Family Friendly Take 2


The first version  of Helen Clark’s criticism of John Key and Bill Enlgish for taking time off with their families is a lot more damning than the second version   which explains it wasn’t a premeditated attack but an answer to a question.

Miss Clark’s comment came in response to this question from a reporter: “Both John Key and Bill English are on holiday. Do you think they’ve got reason to be so confident?” Her response was: “They do seem to work pretty short weeks and years in my experience. I’ve found this job is pretty all-consuming.”

If it wasn’t that she’s made it clear she’s out to attack Key personally you could almost feel sorry for the way that statement has been construed as an attack on them for taking a brief break with their wives and children.

But she has made it patently obvious that since ignoring Key wasn’t working she’s set to go as low as she needs to in attacking him. Having done that she’s in no position to complain that an off the cuff dig landed her in a hole.  

It’s also an indication her once legendary political skills are failing her. Not too long ago she’d have been content to make it clear that what the Opposition did was neither of interest nor importance; now by firing a cheap shot she’s made herself a target.

Quango Hunting Season Opens


Those of us out in the real world will not be surrprised by ANZ Chief economist Cameron Bagrie’s  conclusion that Government spending is being directed into non productive areas.

His study, prompted by a rise in government spending in relation to the economy, found it impossible to assess whether spending was productive, “because no one really knows the counterfactual”.

So instead, Mr Bagrie examined the spending mix — how much was spent on front-line activities, such as welfare benefits, health and education services and police rather than on “back office” (departmental outputs).

`What we find is that back-office (departmental) expenses have exceeded our definition of front-line spending, resulting in an upward trend.”

Growth in departmental outputs has averaged close to 7 percent a year since 1997 while front-line spending increased by 5 percent.

Nominal GDP growth within the economy averaged 5.5 percent. Government spending as a proportion of GDP has fallen from 42 percent in 1995 to 39 percent in 2001 and risen back to the OECD average of 40 percent in 1997.

Mr Bagrie said if the back-office ratio had remained in line with front-line spending then there would have been an extra $1 billion free for other activities and a cumulative saving since 1997 of $3 billion.

It would not have been difficult for people at the front line of public services to find a good use for that money, or some could have been better spent on tax cuts. 

In education, back-office spending had grown annually at 12 percent since 1997, massively outstripping front-line purchases.

Similarly, benefit spending increases had averaged 3 percent while back-office spending had been 7.5 percent a year.

Meanwhile unemployment is at record lows so there are more people in a department helping fewer beneficiaries.

However, in health, the trend was the opposite.

While it was encouraging spending for tomorrow in activities such as education and infrastructure was increasing, it was puzzling relatively more money was going into departmental spending, Mr Bagrie said.

The study found spending in productive government activities (education, law and order, science, housing, defence, employment initiatives, and transport) grew at 5.2 percent compared with those in non productive (departmental outputs, heritage, culture, recreation and economic and industrial services) at 8.4 percent.

That’s a damning indictment on Labour’s priorities.

In another gauge of the spending mix, Mr Bagrie said it appeared growth in spending in “hand-up” activities (front-line education excluding student loans and employment initiatives) was outpacing “hand-out” (benefits) by 4.4 percent to 3.3

At least that is encouraging.

Mr Bagrie acknowledged shortcomings in his definitions and noted the Government may have been playing “catch-up” in departmental spending due to previous under-spending.

He said there were no benchmarks and the mix of spending was not necessarily wrong, particularly as spending priorities were the result of living in a democratic society.

“Nonetheless, we believe the trend across our gauges is sufficiently clear: more government spending is being directed at areas that are not going to the front-line and for consumption today relatively to tomorrow.”

Mr Bagrie said there needed to be measurable benchmarks introduced into the Government’s stated objectives such as the Fiscal Strategy Report.

However, he said the requirement for transparency and rigorous analysis of spending could be overdone and may be part of the problem. Many resources in education and elsewhere were tied up in approval and monitoring rather than simply getting the job done.

In other words too much time, energy and money is wasted on form filling and box ticking.

With 41 government departments, 65 crown entities, 21 District Health Boards and 9 Crown Research Institutes, Mr Bagrie said it may be time for a repeat of the 1980s “quango hunt” to slim government down.

A quango hunt what fun! Let’s start by reducing the number of DHBs.

Sky High Fuel Price for Helicopter


A helicopter pilot who does most of his work in agricultural spraying tells me his monthly fuel bill has gone up from $12,000 to $18,000 this year.

Should Medics Be Able To Strike?


A damning report  on two deaths which occurred because of delays to treatment during a medical radiation technologists’ strike raises the question of whether health professionals should be able to take that sort of industrial action.

A report into a complaint against the Otago District Health Board involving a Dunedin Hospital patient whose treatment was delayed because of strikes suggested “the wrong party is in the dock”.

The report is one of two by Health and Disability Commissioner Ron Paterson on two complaints against the board, arising out of medical radiation technologists (MRT) strikes in 2006.

It says although there is potential to breach an agreement with unions over life-preserving services, hospitals cannot allow patient safety to be jeopardised.

The reports draw attention to the risks to patients during health professionals’ strikes when clinicians are not able to carry out their usual practices, and calls for the Minister of Health to consider better protection for patients during strikes.

Strikes by any other workers may disrupt and annoy people, but those by health professionals have the potential to kill them.

Read the rest of this entry »

Your Page


From time to time someone posts a comment updating, giving a different perspective or making a new point on an old post where it’s unlikely anyone else but me will find it. (This happened here yesterday).

At other times people want to comment on the blog in general or raise something not covered by a post.

That’s why I’ve created Your Page  (under pages between Archives and Recent Posts on the side bar). It gives you the opportunity to do any or all of that; it’s your page, write what you like on it – within the bounds of decency and without defaming anyone.

%d bloggers like this: