‘A bit of a backdown’ on oil and gas exploration annoys Greens

It appears that the government has backed off a bit on it’s contentious ban on new oil and gas exploration, which was applauded by environmentalists and slammed by Taranaki business interests in particular. Is has been pointed out that it could lead to higher carbon emissions as more alternatives were sourced from overseas.

Hamish Rutherford (Stuff):  Symbolic backdown undermines Government’s untidy oil move

After all the hype, the Government’s troubled path to ending new oil exploration has a bizarre sting in the tail: a bit of a backdown.

In the hours before she announced a law change to give effect to decisions announced in April, which mean no new offshore permits, Energy Minister Megan Woods met with the industry to deliver a piece of good news.

Oil explorers facing deadlines on their permits to either commit to exploration wells or relinquish the permits – referred to as “drill or drop” – are likely to be given more breathing space.

It seems the deadline to drill could be pushed back for years, although Woods has not given details other than that she will consider giving more time on a case-by-case basis.

In terms of concessions, it looks like no big deal, given the Government is changing the legislation that frames the sector. No-one in the industry will celebrate this as a victory, given the overall impact of the moves by the Government.

But it seems like Woods is trying to head off a potentially major “what if?” headache.

As it stands, the Barque prospect off the coast of Oamaru will be lost forever if New Zealand Oil and Gas (NZOG) does not find partners willing to commit to the major cost of drilling, by early 2019.

Although the odds of success are put at only one in five, NZOG has claimed that, if successful, Barque could transform New Zealand’s energy outlook, with thousands of jobs and tens of billions of revenue.

Seen this way, Woods’ gesture to the industry looks like a major contradiction of the Government’s plan, to set New Zealand on a renewable future.

Reality wins over idealism?

Greens are not happy.

Both Greenpeace and the Green Party are furious, with the Government’s partners warning it waters down the moves made so far.

Given where we have come from, the latest move should be no surprise.

On a sunny day in March, Ardern walked down the steps of Parliament to greet Greenpeace activists, delivering a major shock that the Government was “actively considering” their call to end oil exploration. Although her speech was more symbol than substance, it was clear major plans were afoot.

As it turned out, the Government was not really considering anything, and it certainly did not want much in the way of advice.

Less than a month later, Ardern would lead a group of ministers into the Beehive theatrette to announce the decision, giving the impression that ministers had considered the matter.

In fact, all that had happened was that the leaders of Labour, NZ First and the Greens had reached a deal. Cabinet had no input in the decision.

Officials were so furious at being sidelined from the decision that it was leaked, spoiling Ardern’s plan for a dramatic announcement at Victoria University.

Greenpeace and the Green Party furious. Officials furious. Officials furious. It looks like this was rushed and bungled.

It should be remembered that this advice comes from bureaucrats who have not only been ignored in the actual decision-making, they are giving advice on a decision that could kill the sector they work in.

Seizing on the fact that – as in all long-term forecasting – the report on the oil exploration decision outlines a vast range of possibilities of the cost (from a few hundred million to more than $50 billion), Acting Prime Minister Winston Peters dismissed it as a “very, very bad piece of analytical work”.

It is fair to say that the official advice offers no accurate guide as to what the fiscal cost of the decision would be.

Given that we do not know the future for carbon prices, oil prices or interest rates, there is no way we could possibly know what that cost would be, a fact which seems lost on Peters.

What we do know is that there will be a cost, and it will likely be significant.

We also know that the way it was handled has had a significant impact on investor confidence in New Zealand, which seems to have dawned on the Government only months later.

It is also likely to have an impact on energy prices, both from the cost of gas to households and its impact on future electricity prices.

Woods said on Monday that, even with the benefit of hindsight and advice, she would still push for exactly the same decision.

Of course, she would say that. But it seems the Government has decided to breathe a little more life into oil exploration, just in case.

Green Party: Minister must not water down oil and gas decision

Green Party: Minister Woods must not water down decision to ban offshore oil and gas exploration

The Green Party does not support Labour Party Minister Woods allowing mining companies with existing offshore oil and gas exploration permits more time to consider if they will drill.

“Mining companies with existing licenses for drilling have a time limit on when they can explore. If they reach the time limit, their permits are handed back to the Crown”, Green Party energy spokesperson Gareth Hughes said today.

They shouldn’t be offered special treatment to extend or waive that time limit.

“I struggle to see the point in banning offshore exploration for oil and gas if existing companies with huge blocks can hold off from exploring until way later down the track.

“New Zealand took an incredibly exciting and brave step for people and planet when we decided to ban future offshore oil and gas exploration.

“It has been congratulated world-wide and New Zealanders are proud of the decision, let’s not water it down.

“I am urging her to reconsider this proposal”.

Remember Gareth Hughes? I’m not sure how much clout he has. He is till an MP but is far from prominent.

 

Bill Cosby sentenced to prison, counselling for life

After being found guilt of drugging and sexually assaulting a victim Bill Cosby has been sentenced to prison and lifetime counselling. The victim is just one of many woman who have claimed that Cosby assaulted them.

RNZ:  Bill Cosby sentenced to prison for sex assault

Cosby, 81, has also been categorised as a sexually violent predator, meaning he must undergo counselling for life and be listed on the sex offender registry.

At a retrial in April, Cosby was found guilty of three counts of sexual assault for drugging and molesting Andrea Constand in 2004.

Ahead of the sentence, Judge Steven O’Neill designated Cosby a sexually violent predator, despite the defence’s argument that Cosby’s age and blindness mean he is not a threat.

Tuesday’s classification means he will need to register with state police and notify any community he lives in of his sex offender status, as well as undergo mandatory counselling for life.

The actor’s defence team had argued the state’s sex offender law was too severe given Cosby’s age and the fact that he is legally blind.

The comedian was arrested in 2015 and a deadlocked jury resulted in a mistrial in June 2017.

This year’s retrial occurred amid the #MeToo movement that has seen people worldwide come forward to share stories of sexual harassment and assault.

Justice has been served to some extent on an alleged long term serial offender.

Ardern promotes baby inspired change at UN

Jacinda Ardern has gone full on baby promotion at the United Nations.

CNN: Jacinda Ardern hopes taking her baby into UN General Assembly will inspire change

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has told CNN she hoped the decision to bring her 3-month-old baby to the United Nations General Assembly would “create a path for other women.”

Ardern’s daughter Neve was in the audience as her mother addressed the assembly while her father, Clarke Gayford, held the baby.

“I want to normalize it,” she told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, of Neve’s presence at a work event.

“If we want to make workplaces more open, we need to acknowledge logistical challenges… by being more open it might create a path for other women.

“What I consistently acknowledge is that I have assistants who help Clarke with the ability to juggle his career and be our primary caregiver,” she said.

“What has struck me is the number of men and women who have said ‘we do the same thing.’ There’s a lot of discussion… And we need to normalize that too.”

It may have some positive effects, but I’m not sure the UN will be enhanced by a smattering of crying babies and children running up and down the aisles. Who knows – it could inspire some changes in a dysfunctional place.

It would have more impact to have an impoverished African or Indian or North Korean mother and her starving bay speaking at the UN.

She says the forward-thinking nature of the public has been hugely supportive since she announced her pregnancy.

“I’d classify us as being incredibly progressive,” she said of New Zealanders.

“The fact I’m the third female Prime Minister, I never grew up believing my gender would stand in the way of doing anything I wanted.

“I credit the women who came before me and credit New Zealanders for welcoming me having a child… positivity outweighed negativity. I’m proud of the nation.”

Good promotion for new Zealand, but I’m not sure what it is going to do for us here.

Does this mean Ardern will be using her baby more as a symbol in our Parliament? Neve may at least look more mature than some of the behaviour in the debating chamber.

Trump to UN: “We reject the ideology of globalism and accept the ideology of patriotism”

Donald Trump has just finished his speech to the United Nations General Assembly.

Full text of Trump’s speech here.

Today, I stand before the United Nations General Assembly to share the extraordinary progress we’ve made.

In less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.
America’s — so true. (Laughter.) Didn’t expect that reaction, but that’s okay. (Laughter and applause.)

The audience was quite different to his usual self-lauding rallies where his grandiose claims are accepted without question or sniggering.

America’s economy is booming like never before. Since my election, we’ve added $10 trillion in wealth. The stock market is at an all-time high in history, and jobless claims are at a 50-year low.

We have passed the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history. We’ve started the construction of a major border wall, and we have greatly strengthened border security.

We have secured record funding for our military — $700 billion this year, and $716 billion next year. Our military will soon be more powerful than it has ever been before.

In other words, the United States is stronger, safer, and a richer country than it was when I assumed office less than two years ago.

We are standing up for America and for the American people. And we are also standing up for the world.

That’s a bit contradictory.

This is great news for our citizens and for peace-loving people everywhere.

Each of us here today is the emissary of a distinct culture, a rich history, and a people bound together by ties of memory, tradition, and the values that make our homelands like nowhere else on Earth.

That is why America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control, and domination.

His attempts at coercion and his threats receive more attention than cooperation.

With support from many countries here today, we have engaged with North Korea to replace the specter of conflict with a bold and new push for peace.

I would like to thank Chairman Kim for his courage and for the steps he has taken, though much work remains to be done. The sanctions will stay in place until denuclearization occurs.

There is a lot still to be done in US-North Korean relations.

In the Middle East, our new approach is also yielding great strides and very historic change.

That’s highly debatable.

The UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have pledged billions of dollars to aid the people of Syria and Yemen. And they are pursuing multiple avenues to ending Yemen’s horrible, horrific civil war.

The ongoing tragedy in Syria is heartbreaking. Our shared goals must be the de-escalation of military conflict, along with a political solution that honors the will of the Syrian people. In this vein, we urge the United Nations-led peace process be reinvigorated. But, rest assured, the United States will respond if chemical weapons are deployed by the Assad regime.

Two brutal ongoing civil wars does not look like progress, and that’s just the current violence besetting the Middle East.

Every solution to the humanitarian crisis in Syria must also include a strategy to address the brutal regime that has fueled and financed it: the corrupt dictatorship in Iran.

Iran’s leaders sow chaos, death, and destruction. They do not respect their neighbors or borders, or the sovereign rights of nations. Instead, Iran’s leaders plunder the nation’s resources to enrich themselves and to spread mayhem across the Middle East and far beyond.

No progress there.

This year, we also took another significant step forward in the Middle East. In recognition of every sovereign state to determine its own capital, I moved the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

That may have been progress applauded by the Israeli government, but it was not widely supported and did nothing to resolve the Palestinian problems.

The United States is committed to a future of peace and stability in the region, including peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. That aim is advanced, not harmed, by acknowledging the obvious facts.

Yeah, right.

America’s policy of principled realism means we will not be held hostage to old dogmas, discredited ideologies, and so-called experts who have been proven wrong over the years, time and time again. This is true not only in matters of peace, but in matters of prosperity.

We believe that trade must be fair and reciprocal. The United States will not be taken advantage of any longer.

Instead under trump they are trying to use their size and power to force trade agreements favourable to the US.

For decades, the United States opened its economy — the largest, by far, on Earth — with few conditions. We allowed foreign goods from all over the world to flow freely across our borders.

Yet, other countries did not grant us fair and reciprocal access to their markets in return.

“Few conditions” and the one-sideness of this is debatable.

For this reason, we are systematically renegotiating broken and bad trade deals.

Trade deals done in good faith between the US and other countries.

Last month, we announced a groundbreaking U.S.-Mexico trade agreement. And just yesterday, I stood with President Moon to announce the successful completion of the brand new U.S.-Korea trade deal. And this is just the beginning.

Many nations in this hall will agree that the world trading system is in dire need of change. For example, countries were admitted to the World Trade Organization that violate every single principle on which the organization is based. While the United States and many other nations play by the rules, these countries use government-run industrial planning and state-owned enterprises to rig the system in their favor. They engage in relentless product dumping, forced technology transfer, and the theft of intellectual property.

But those days are over. We will no longer tolerate such abuse. We will not allow our workers to be victimized, our companies to be cheated, and our wealth to be plundered and transferred. America will never apologize for protecting its citizens.

The United States has just announced tariffs on another $200 billion in Chinese-made goods for a total, so far, of $250 billion. I have great respect and affection for my friend, President Xi, but I have made clear our trade imbalance is just not acceptable. China’s market distortions and the way they deal cannot be tolerated.

Trump has openly precipitated (and bragged about winning) a trade war that may have serious repercussions to trade around the world, including New Zealand. Slapping on massive tariffs is not a great way of “systematically renegotiating” trade deals.

As my administration has demonstrated, America will always act in our national interest.

That’s pretty much the aim of any country.

I spoke before this body last year and warned that the U.N. Human Rights Council had become a grave embarrassment to this institution, shielding egregious human rights abusers while bashing America and its many friends.

So the United States took the only responsible course: We withdrew from the Human Rights Council, and we will not return until real reform is enacted.

For similar reasons, the United States will provide no support in recognition to the International Criminal Court. As far as America is concerned, the ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy, and no authority. The ICC claims near-universal jurisdiction over the citizens of every country, violating all principles of justice, fairness, and due process. We will never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.

Trump wants no international accountability on human rights and international justice.

America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism, and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism.

Around the world, responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination.

Here in the Western Hemisphere, we are committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment of expansionist foreign powers.

It has been the formal policy of our country since President Monroe that we reject the interference of foreign nations in this hemisphere and in our own affairs.

Highly ironic given the history of US interference in other countries.

The United States is also working with partners in Latin America to confront threats to sovereignty from uncontrolled migration. Tolerance for human struggling and human smuggling and trafficking is not humane.

Illegal immigration funds criminal networks, ruthless gangs, and the flow of deadly drugs. Illegal immigration exploits vulnerable populations, hurts hardworking citizens, and has produced a vicious cycle of crime, violence, and poverty. Only by upholding national borders, destroying criminal gangs, can we break this cycle and establish a real foundation for prosperity.

But it’s not this simple. Many of those trying to immigrate into the US are trying to escape human struggling and suffering. The US has a right to stop illegal immigrants, but that doesn’t address a lot of suffering.

Ultimately, the only long-term solution to the migration crisis is to help people build more hopeful futures in their home countries. Make their countries great again.

A good ideal, but Trump’s actions don’t fit with helping with this.

Virtually everywhere socialism or communism has been tried, it has produced suffering, corruption, and decay. Socialism’s thirst for power leads to expansion, incursion, and oppression. All nations of the world should resist socialism and the misery that it brings to everyone.

That doesn’t fit with “I honor the right of every nation in this room to pursue its own customs, beliefs, and traditions.”

We are grateful for all the work the United Nations does around the world to help people build better lives for themselves and their families.

The United States is the world’s largest giver in the world, by far, of foreign aid.

Moving forward, we are only going to give foreign aid to those who respect us and, frankly, are our friends. And we expect other countries to pay their fair share for the cost of their defense.

That won’t do anything towards making broken countries ‘great again’.  It exacerbates ‘them versus us’.

The United States is committed to making the United Nations more effective and accountable. I have said many times that the United Nations has unlimited potential. As part of our reform effort, I have told our negotiators that the United States will not pay more than 25 percent of the U.N. peacekeeping budget. This will encourage other countries to step up, get involved, and also share in this very large burden.

Perhaps paying and doing less will leave gaps for other countries to step up into, but I’m not sure that will lead to outcomes that the US will want to see.

Only when each of us does our part and contributes our share can we realize the U.N.’s highest aspirations. We must pursue peace without fear, hope without despair, and security without apology.

One of the biggest problems with the Security Council is the power of veto by the US and six other countries. No sign of addressing that.

The whole world is richer, humanity is better, because of this beautiful constellation of nations, each very special, each very unique, and each shining brightly in its part of the world.

In each one, we see awesome promise of a people bound together by a shared past and working toward a common future.

As for Americans, we know what kind of future we want for ourselves. We know what kind of a nation America must always be.

In America, we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. We believe in self-government and the rule of law. And we prize the culture that sustains our liberty -– a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence. We celebrate our heroes, we treasure our traditions, and above all, we love our country.

Inside everyone in this great chamber today, and everyone listening all around the globe, there is the heart of a patriot that feels the same powerful love for your nation, the same intense loyalty to your homeland.

The passion that burns in the hearts of patriots and the souls of nations has inspired reform and revolution, sacrifice and selflessness, scientific breakthroughs, and magnificent works of art.

Our task is not to erase it, but to embrace it. To build with it. To draw on its ancient wisdom. And to find within it the will to make our nations greater, our regions safer, and the world better.

This sounds very written. It doesn’t sound at all like Trump at his rallies.

To unleash this incredible potential in our people, we must defend the foundations that make it all possible. Sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived, democracy has ever endured, or peace has ever prospered. And so we must protect our sovereignty and our cherished independence above all.

When we do, we will find new avenues for cooperation unfolding before us. We will find new passion for peacemaking rising within us. We will find new purpose, new resolve, and new spirit flourishing all around us, and making this a more beautiful world in which to live.

So together, let us choose a future of patriotism, prosperity, and pride. Let us choose peace and freedom over domination and defeat. And let us come here to this place to stand for our people and their nations, forever strong, forever sovereign, forever just, and forever thankful for the grace and the goodness and the glory of God.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the nations of the world.

A pity about the God references.

There is a lot of carefully thought through and written rhetoric in this speech. There is nothing particularly new or divisive or derisive. It’s hardly ground changing or world changing.

There is a clash between two things – patriotism and self interests for individual nations (particularly the US), and the need for international cooperation. A functional peaceful world requires a balance of both. I’m not sure that Trump himself understands balance.

 

 

 

Media watch – Wednesday

26 September 2018

MediaWatch

Media Watch is a focus on New Zealand media, blogs and social media. You can post any items of interested related to media.

A primary aim here is to hold media to account in the political arena. A credible and questioning media is an essential part of a healthy democracy.

A general guideline – post opinion on or excerpts from and links to blog posts or comments of interest, whether they are praise, criticism, pointing out issues or sharing useful information.

General chat

“Is there any way we could have a thread for the more lightweight stuff like music and general chat?”

Do it here. Please no personal attacks or bickering. Anything abusive, provocative or inflammatory may be deleted.

Open Forum – Wednesday

25 September 2018

Forum

This post is open to anyone to comment on any topic that isn’t spam, illegal or offensive. All Your NZ posts are open but this one is for you to raise topics that interest you. 

If providing opinions on or summaries of other information also provide a link to that information. Bloggers are welcome to summarise and link to their posts.

Comments worth more exposure may be repeated as posts.Comments from other forums can be repeated here, cut and paste is fine.

Your NZ is a mostly political and social issues blog but not limited to that, and views from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome. Some ground rules:

  • If possible support arguments, news, points or opinions with links to sources and facts.
  • Please don’t post anything illegal, potentially defamatory or abusive.

FIRST TIME COMMENTERS: Due to abuse by a few, first comments under any ID will park in moderation until released (as soon as possible but it can sometimes take a while).

Sometimes comments will go into moderation or spam automatically due to mistyped ID, too many links (>4), or trigger text or other at risk criteria.

Free speech is an important principle here but some people who might pose a risk to the site may be limited.

World view – Tuesday

Tuesday GMT

WorldWatch2

For posting on events, news, opinions and anything of interest from around the world.

Otago University proctor admits he was wrong to enter flats and remove bongs

After a growing student protest over the Otago University proctor entering at least one flat uninvited and removing bongs – legal to own but illegal to use with cannabis – the proctor Dave Scott has fessed up today.

ODT:  ‘I was wrong’ – Proctor

University of Otago proctor Dave Scott has acknowledged he was wrong to enter a flat while no-one was home and confiscate bongs, but says he doesn’t think his actions make him a criminal.

“I’m a human and I have made an error of judgement on this occasion [and] I’ve apologised to the flat in question this afternoon for what I did.

“I have made a mistake here and I am willing to learn from it.”

Asked if he broke the law, he said he was not above scrutiny and acknowledged he was wrong.

“Does that make me a criminal? I don’t believe so.

“This was a situation that could have been dealt with differently.”

However this could be a confession to committing a criminal act.

Vice-chancellor Prof Harlene Hayne said the university still had “full confidence” in Mr Scott, saying he had assured her he would not repeat the mistake.

“I have discussed the proctor’s actions with him and he agrees this will not happen again.

“In my experience of the proctor on so many occasions he always has the students’ best interests at heat, and has worked extremely hard to ensure students are treated fairly while they are here.”

But there is a lack of confidence amongst students. Stuff (before the confession and apology): Private prosecution pending against University of Otago’s bong-taking proctor

Thousands of dollars have been pledged to mount a private prosecution against the bong-taking University of Otago proctor.

The tertiary institution is standing by Dave Scott, a former police officer, who removed drug-taking equipment from at least four student flats.

Hundreds have signed a petition calling for Scott’s immediate resignation though, and a private prosecution against him is pending.

Whakamana Cannabis Museum curator Abe Gray said a cannabis supporter known to him had pledged $25,000 to take a private prosecution.

Otago law professor Andrew Geddis: Hey, proctor, leave our bongs alone: How Otago’s ‘campus cop’ is breaking the law

We start with the fact that the proctor simply is a university employee who, while holding some disciplinary powers over students, enjoys no more legal right to visit their residences, search them and seize property than does any other citizen. And, as other legal academics have told the ODT, those legal rights simply do not extend to going into someone’s house to take what you think may be evidence of criminal behaviour.

Or, to put it more bluntly, what the proctor did was clearly unlawful and at least potentially criminal. The fact he did so with proclaimed good intentions does not change this conclusion.

In my view, there’s no reasonable argument to be made that students consuming cannabis in their own living room has “a sufficient nexus to the legitimate concerns of the university” to justify the code’s application. Simply put, while smoking cannabis in your own home may (stupidly) still be illegal, doing so is none of the university’s business and so the proctor has no disciplinary authority over those who choose to consume.

But here’s the problem. If the proctor is going to act as a paternalistic morals police over what students do in their own homes, then students really need to ask whether they want that form of governance over their lives. And if they don’t, then they ought to take action to prevent it.

Because the proctor (and all other university employees) only may enter onto student property under the general “implied licence” that applies to all visitors. This is the general legal presumption that an occupier will permit people to walk up to their front door in order to communicate with them

However, that implied licence may be expressly revoked at any time. If the occupier tells someone (or, even the world at large) “you may not come onto my property”, then the presumed legal right to visit disappears.

So, if students do not want the proctor (or other university employees) to know what they are doing in their homes, much less intervene by taking things he disapproves of, then they can tell him that. An email to his office informing him that he is not permitted to enter a particular flat’s grounds. A notice in the flat’s front window telling him that he (or other university employees) cannot be on the property.

There have been signs of a ‘keep away sign’ campaign, but that could be dependant on whether the proctor makes a solid commitment to respect the private dwellings and property of students.

 

 

 

30% pay increase for social workers

Oranga Tamariki social workers will get an average pay boost of 30% spread over two years. This has been called  achieving pay equity, but that’s a vague claim. Nevertheless, I think that social work is demanding, very important, and had been grossly underpaid, so this is a meaningful adjustment.


Pay equity near for Oranga Tamariki social workers

Cabinet has agreed to fund a pay equity settlement for Oranga Tamariki social workers, Minister for Children Tracey Martin announced today.

The Minister said that an agreement in principle has been reached between Oranga Tamariki and the PSA on a settlement worth $114.6m over five years.

“I want to acknowledge the efforts of both the Oranga Tamariki and the PSA, who have worked together in good faith to examine the claim and reach agreement.

“This is another demonstration of this Government’s commitment to pay equity for all women in New Zealand. Just a week after we celebrated 125 years of women’s suffrage, this decision recognises a historic gender-based undervaluation of Oranga Tamariki social workers, who perform vital work in keeping children and families safe.”

The pay equity settlement applies to more than 1300 Oranga Tamariki social workers and will see an average lift in their salaries of 30.6% over a two year period.

Oranga Tamariki and PSA will jointly present the settlement to those in scope of the claim, at a series of meetings around New Zealand over the two weeks from October 8.

Oranga Tamariki social workers, who are PSA members, will then vote on whether to accept it.


From a report on 1 News showing social workers and union officials celebrating it seems like it’s a done deal.

PayScale says that the range of current salaries for social workers is NZ$39,580 – NZ$66,440 with a median of $49,853. That isn’t much for a job requiring special skills working in a very demanding field.

The Oranga Tamariki and PSA Pay Equity Working Group has worked closely together since April 2017 to assess the Social Worker pay equity claim and apply the principles agreed by the Joint Working Group in 2015.

So this process of reassessment of wage levels began under the last government and has been completed this term. That’s a common cross-term process.

It is an increase of government expenditure on top of significant increases for nurses, with teachers, police and other sectors also lining up.

I think it is likely to put pressure on private sector social worker employers who will either have to match the increases or risk not attracting and retaining staff. They are mostly taxpayer funded organisations so the Government may have to come to the party there too.

But I think it’s hard to argue with a decent increase for the workers.