Ardern speaks to students in Dunedin

ODT: First-year students urged to tackle NZ’s biggest problems

New Zealand needs you.

That was the simple message Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern gave the country’s future leaders gathered at the University of Otago’s convocation ceremony last night.

During her speech Ms Ardern encouraged the 4000 first-year students in Forsyth Barr Stadium to make the most of their abilities and not let self doubts impede their potential.

“You may assume I had embarked on a degree in politics with some assurance of where I would go, that I was confident, I was on a path to be an MP or at least work in politics.

“You would be wrong.”

Ms Ardern told the new students the country needed them to tackle some of the greatest challenges facing New Zealand, such as climate change, inequality and child poverty.

“That is why we need you, it is why we need your education and why we need your confidence.”

In return, Ms Ardern promised her Government would take the same approach.

One of the biggest cheers of the night came after Ms Ardern mentioned her Government’s policy of first-year, fee-free tertiary study.

“You’re welcome,” she said with a smile.

That’s not a surprise, given that the students are the first recipients of a major government handout.

69 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  February 20, 2018

    Great insert picture of the crowd. It was exactly as I envisaged while reading the headline.

  2. PDB

     /  February 20, 2018

    Preaching to the converted (bribed with taxpayer money).

    • alloytoo

       /  February 20, 2018

      Ah but will they stay bribed?

    • duperez

       /  February 20, 2018

      Different context sure, but is the picture really that different to all those we see over the years of politicians preaching to the converted (bribed with taxpayer money)?

      Or those we saw in the months before the last election of politicians parading in schools up and down the country preaching to hopefully to be converted?

      • PDB

         /  February 20, 2018

        Possibly different if you are comparing tax cuts as a bribe to students being bribed. One is a reduction in tax to those already contributing the most to the govt coffers (and a fix for
        bracket-creep’ or being over-taxed) whilst the other is to students that overall contribute very little tax to the govt coffers.

        Then you get into the argument of whether or not ‘investing’ in students is a good idea regardless of the above. I’d suggest it is BUT the way the new govt has done it is ass-about-face. Any financial incentive/payment/reimbursement should be given towards the end of a students studies once results and their true intentions are known, not before they even start.

  3. Gerrit

     /  February 20, 2018

    Taxpayer handout. The government is the bagman.

    Hopefully they will all get degrees, enter high paying non state jobs in the tradable sector so as to pay the taxes that will fund the next crop of students.

    No politician ever seems to place that responsibility on the students.

    “The tradable sector of a country’s economy is made up of the industry sectors whose output in terms of goods and services are traded internationally, or could be traded internationally given a plausible variation in relative prices.”

    • Blazer

       /  February 20, 2018

      the tradeable sector was ignored by National in favour of the ….speculative..sector.

      • Gerrit

         /  February 20, 2018

        Sonny Jim Blazer…More teachings for you. You cannot have an efficient tradeable sector without speculators. Without a tradeable sector you have no tax payers.

        Speculators provide market liquidity and efficiency
        ,
        “This efficiency is difficult to achieve without speculators. Speculators take information and speculate on how it affects prices, producers and consumers, who may want to hedge their risks…A very beneficial by-product of speculation for the economy is price discovery.”

        Speculators provide risk management for producers

        “Speculators perform a risk bearing role that can be beneficial to society. For example, a farmer might be considering planting corn on some unused farmland. However, he might not want to do so because he is concerned that the price might fall too far by harvest time. By selling his crop in advance at a fixed price to a speculator, he is now able to hedge the price risk and so he can plant the corn. Thus, speculators can actually increase production through their willingness to take on risk (not at the loss of profit)”.

        Worth a read for your discovery

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speculation

        You may want to read the economic disadvantages as well especially the “Winners Curse”. This applies to the Auckland housing market.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winner%27s_curse

        • Blazer

           /  February 20, 2018

          you may want to read this…the FIRE economy…is NT…
          https://web.stanford.edu/group/FRI/indonesia/documents/pambook/Output/chap64.html

          • Gezza

             /  February 20, 2018

            What the heck has the New Testament got to do with this?

            • Gezza

               /  February 20, 2018

              Oh, I see – non-tradeable. You & your initialism fetish.

          • Gerrit

             /  February 20, 2018

            That was not the argument. The argument is that the tradeable sector cannot exist without the “speculator”.

            The “speculator” can be the supermarket buying produce to sell to you.

            You could go directly to the producer but your needs and volume would not be enough to make it worthwhile for the producer. He needs a speculator (supermarket) to buy ALL his produce so that he can sell it onto as many Blazers as visit his market..

            The speculator does not produce nor does he buy for his own use (well very limited). .

            The argument in your link is in regard say a electricity retailer and price setting in a social context. .

            • Blazer

               /  February 20, 2018

              you are parroting the Wall St nonsense ,which always tries to justify parasitical behaviour.Parasites have a role in the natural order of things,but speculation is not noble…even in a ballgown.

            • The tradeable sector cannot exist without the speculator but land is different
              http://imgbox.com/hPbuHrAE

        • Blazer

           /  February 20, 2018

          your link..’The view of what distinguishes investment from speculation and speculation from excessive speculation varies widely among pundits, legislators and academics

        • Gezza

           /  February 20, 2018

          Why does he need to sell it to a speculator? Why not just to a supplier?

          • Gerrit

             /  February 20, 2018

            Speculator = purchaser = reseller = retailer.

            The producer (say off cabbages) want to sell to as many Blazers as he can. To break even, lets say he needs to sell 1000 cabbages a week. he could set up a stall outside his cabbage patch and wait for 1000 Blazers a week to drive past. His catchment are for customers is only the passersby.

            Now a speculator comes along who has an outlet in the main shopping street where he knows 1000 Blazers will visit per week and he speculates that each will buy a cabbage per week.

            So he does a speculative deal with the produce to take 1000 cabbages per week.

            What this does is takes the fear of growing 1000 cabbages per week without sales from the producer, he can safely buy more cabbage seeds, diesel for his tractor, pay taxes, etc.

            He transfers the liability of having to sell 1000 cabbages per week to the speculator. The speculator makes a cut (we all have to pay taxes) and passes the procurement and profit markup onto the Blazers of this world.

            As you can see he does not produce or buy anything for himself. He is a merchant but a speculator none the less.

            • Blazer

               /  February 20, 2018

              you are substituting ‘speculator’ for wholesaler.You argument is one of…semantics.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  February 20, 2018

              What is a speculator Blazer, if not someone who takes on the risk of a good or service in the hope of on-selling at a profit?
              Gerrit is entirely correct.
              Where speculation falls over as an altruistic and market friendly pursuit is when the end consumer is forgotten and speculators buy off each other in ever decreasing circles chasing ever bigger returns and market fundamentals are left behind.

            • Gerrit

               /  February 20, 2018

              Wholesaler = speculator. Financier = speculator.

              Not semantics at all.

              Air new Zealand when it wants to buy a new plane does not go to Boeing or Airbus with $200M from petty cash or turnover or retained profits to buy a plane. They don’t cut shareholders returns either to fund the plane.

              The get financiers to fund the purchase, the financier speculates on the risk (can Air New Zealand choose the right routes and fill the plane to capacity for the duration of the loan) to let Air New Zealand and Boeing or Airbus to trade. The financier takes the risk that Air New Zealand does not fold and he /she is left with an empty plane parked up at an airport and costing storage fees.

              In the past the state has facilitated this and have been speculators on the Air New Zealand management ability.

            • Blazer

               /  February 20, 2018

              ‘In the past the state has facilitated this and have been speculators on the Air New Zealand management ability.’…seeing as the state had to bail out Air NZ after, Sir Selwyn Cushing brought it to its knees as a private run entity ,not surprising.In case you didn’t know a Govt guarantee is as good as it gets in the world of finance.In your and HFD’s world everyone is a speculator.The person who is employed ,speculates his employer will not go broke and continue to pay him.If someone buys a car,they speculate it will not break down,every day,if you buy insurance you speculate that any claims will be able to be…paid…etc,etc.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  February 20, 2018

              You have an outstanding record of reading something quite clear and coming up with a completely incorrect understanding Blazer.

              The defining factor as a speculator is that they are not the producer or the consumer. They fit in between as a middleman playing arbitrage and hoping to add value to both sides, be it through convenience, liquidity, economies of scale or risk mitigation.

              As Gerrit said, they perform essential functions in a trading economy.

              However, speculation can also be counterproductive when it becomes an end in itself.

            • Blazer

               /  February 20, 2018

              speculators are neither altruistic or noble….they are driven by greed,opportunistic….vultures looking for a carcass.

            • Blazer

               /  February 20, 2018

              @HFD…simpliity..itself…do you agree with Gerrits statement?…’In the past the state has facilitated this and have been speculators on the Air New Zealand management ability.’.

            • Gerrit

               /  February 20, 2018

              Blazer, if you are as a state control proponent I would say you have no idea how free markets work. Son, take a read through this with an open mind (am hopeful but prepared to be let down and not holding my breath you will understand).

              https://fee.org/articles/why-speculators/

              “Such specialists must estimate, at the time production starts, what consumer demand, competitive supplies, and other market condi­tions are likely to be at the time of sale. Such speculators then as­sume the responsibility that the planned production will meet the whims and wishes of consumers. Their income will depend on how correct their early predictions of future conditions prove to be”.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  February 20, 2018

              Excellent article Gerrit. Explains it all very well. Even Blaze may gain some understanding!

              And Blazer, yes I do agree – the Government speculated by buying Air NZ shares (82% of them!) very cheaply and rode a great recovery, much of which was courtesy of your favourite Chairman Mr Norris. He made Michael Cullen look very good.

              “On 18 January 2002 the New Zealand Government invested $892 million in Air New Zealand, giving the Crown an 82% ownership stake in the company. A further $149 million was invested in Air New Zealand in a rights issue in December 2004, taking the total invested by the Crown to $1,042 million.

              So what financial returns has the Crown received for this investment?
              Using an internal rate of return (IRR) calculation, I estimate that the Crown has received a return of 8.4% per year[1] from its shareholding in Air New Zealand, as at 9 May 2016.”

              http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/staff-insights/crown-investment-anz-pt1

            • Blazer

               /  February 20, 2018

              @Gerrit…hey dad ,please tell me the countries that run a free market.cheers.

            • Blazer

               /  February 20, 2018

              @HFD…you are being mischievous now…so Sir Selwyn was a dud,but when the Govt got involved and appointed Norris a turnaround occurred.You should know that as the national airline,NZ’s international flag bearer ,Air was rescued as a strategic asset.Right wing theory says the Govt cannot pick winners in the private sector,yet when we look at Govt bailouts they are remarkably successful…put the BNZ on the list as ..well.You may give Norris the credit and in time honoured tradition he will take it…when it’spositive=brilliant governance,when it fails=blame everyone else as Norris did..tradies,auditors,QS staff.Typical b/s.And btw..you did not answer my query yesterday,so I will educate you…Norris’ predecessor was Ralph Waters,acknowledged as the most succesful FBU chair in the modern era.So you got that wrong…

  4. robertguyton

     /  February 20, 2018

    Clearly, they love her.

    • Gezza

       /  February 20, 2018

      Of course. She’s a beer drinker (well, probably not at the moment).

    • alloytoo

       /  February 20, 2018

      Clearly they love our money.

      • PDB

         /  February 20, 2018

        Just as kids these days have no concept of where meat comes from so it will it be with money.

    • Gerrit

       /  February 20, 2018

      If

      “One of the biggest cheers of the night came after Ms Ardern mentioned her Government’s policy of first-year, fee-free tertiary study.”

      I suggest they “love” her for the money, not so much per personally.

      • robertguyton

         /  February 20, 2018

        Pinch-faced curmudgeons!

        • Gezza

           /  February 20, 2018

          😳 What? They all seemed quite happy with her from the reports I’ve read.

  5. sorethumb

     /  February 20, 2018

    Female staying at motor camp 40mins from work. Gets up at 3am . 14 hour day. Complains if boss gives her 3 days off (Queenstown) as she cant ean enough. Labour policies are directly responsible
    https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.co.nz/2016/02/mike-butler-research-does-not-back.html
    Those bum-faces are the future: “I was in Cairns and I was at a restaurant where I was served by an Irish girl and there was a Thai and etc, etc” (I am suckling pig who spends my wealth enjoying myself while internationals suckle me).

    • PartisanZ

       /  February 20, 2018

      Strong links to Muriel Newman’s so-called ‘NZ Centre for Political Research’ and, of course, Mike Butler himself is a key figure and self-published ‘writer’ of anti-Maori race-hate diatribes at Kiwi FrontLine …

      Ian Harrison of ‘Tailrisk Economics’ seems to be much on the same page? Interesting choice of company ‘branding’ there …

      Still, someone who critiques The New Zealand Initiative can’t be all bad …

      “Takes every kind of Think Tank,
      To make the world go round … “

  6. sorethumb

     /  February 20, 2018

    Ms Ardern told the new students the country needed them to tackle some of the greatest challenges facing New Zealand, such as climate change, inequality and child poverty.
    ……………
    Cliche

  7. PartisanZ

     /  February 20, 2018

    Let students find their way, and their true vocations, through study unencumbered by unnecessary ‘market-oriented’ qualification stress and unreasonable debt …

    The future they create will be all the better for it …

    Its a great pity, a source of massive generational shame and an indictment upon our society that, having had the opportunity we are finally returning to them, my generation cannot say the same …

    Simple formula: As capitalism is fundamentally opposed to democracy, so capitalist privatized education is inexorably opposed to autonomous learning …

    • David

       /  February 20, 2018

      “Let students find their way, and their true vocations, through study unencumbered by unnecessary ‘market-oriented’ qualification stress and unreasonable debt …”

      They have that choice. There are vast amounts of freely available education at a very high quality around, no need to spend hundreds of thousand attending a university for years on end full time.

      • PartisanZ

         /  February 20, 2018

        Yet “attending a university for years on end full time” is exactly what our privatized education society pressurizes them to do … to gain the qualifications they need to ‘succeed’ and ‘do well in life’ … and maybe one day “buy a house” and even maybe “a property portfolio” …

        Moreover, because most don’t have the money to spend they are pressurized to get deeply into debt before they even qualify … and, I suspect, those whose parents can afford to pay probably take advantage of student loan and student allowance anyhow … effectively rorting the system …

        Meantime the vital and magnificent Western history of ‘liberal arts’ education – which traditionally included both youthful subject exploration and a grounding in essentials like philosophy and ethics is undermined in favour of mere ‘job qualifications’ … so they can sit in the queue on the gridlocked motorway each morning … to repay the debt …

        • Blazer

           /  February 20, 2018

          last sentence is absolutely….sublime!

          • PDB

             /  February 20, 2018

            I always find PZ’s last sentence is the one I most look forward to.

    • Gezza

       /  February 20, 2018

      The future they create will be all the better for it …
      One hopes. But remember that we’re living the future the last lot of taxpayer-funded students created. And none of us would’ve figured on that back then.

      • PartisanZ

         /  February 20, 2018

        Drowned in a tsunami of New-Right materialism …

        To tatou whakama …

        • Gezza

           /  February 20, 2018

          Well, the taxpayer-funded students become the professionals, the ones with the big salaries, the big bucks per minute crew, the elites. Then they want to keep it … and make more of it.

        • Trevors_elbow

           /  February 20, 2018

          What drivel Pnz…. student loans have opened the door to tertiary study for so many since introduced….

          This free sgit taxes dish washers and cleaners to fund middle class kids into high paying jobs via uni quals

          • PartisanZ

             /  February 20, 2018

            Absolute twaddle Trevors_elbow. It never ceases to amaze me which socio-political trends Righties assume are related to one another … Example: The Fourth Labour government’s ‘progressive’ social policies and Rogerednomics …

            First, since 2006 there’s been a slight trend downwards in tertiary participation –

            https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/statistics/indicators/main/student-engagement-participation/participation_rates_in_tertiary_education

            From 1996 – 2006 young people’s participation in STUDY increased from 8% – nearly 14% of the population over 15 –

            http://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/employment_and_unemployment/young-people-1986-2006-study-work-income/study.aspx

            Incredible that these so-called ‘statistics’ can be headed 1986 – 2006 and yet the study graphs are all 1996 – 2006! Control of information, as we know from the OIA, means everything for anti-democratic capitalism …

            I can’t find older data or spend all day searching. I know you’re wrong to assume the two are inextricably linked – increased tertiary and privatized tertiary. An increase in student numbers undertaking tertiary education has been a long-term trend … Before people became ‘human capital’ …

            The Rogered change to privatized tertiary might have altered what people study … and even pressured more into studying out of fear, but the growth trend was there and to think it will be diminished by ‘fees free’ is rather an odd conclusion …

            • Gezza

               /  February 20, 2018

              A curiosity only at this stage but I wonder how dropout rates compare & if any data is around on that. That’s not to presuppose taxpayer-funded tertiary dropout rates are higher than fee-paying. 9/10 uni students I knew completed their studies graduated, including some who dropped out but then eventually returned. And some students possibly still drop out because of failing grades &/or cost.

  8. David

     /  February 20, 2018

    “Ms Ardern told the new students the country needed them to tackle some of the greatest challenges facing New Zealand, such as climate change, inequality and child poverty.”

    Isn’t that Ms Ardern’s job?

    • duperez

       /  February 20, 2018

      Isn’t that Ms Ardern’s job?

      And it’s hers alone? She can do it all by herself? And if all those things don’t turn out to be perfect it’s her fault?

      Maybe her job is outlining the issues as she sees them. Maybe part of her job is making people aware. Maybe part of her job is getting people on board.

      Our job apparently is to sit and snipe and grasp any opportunity or create any opportunity to do that.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  February 20, 2018

        If that’s your job Parti, you deserve a promotion.
        Left, Right, Centre, Labour, National or Greens, high tax, low tax, interventionist or market led, you are always there with right wing neoliberalism being the devil.
        Welcome to middle management in the Snipe team.

        • High Flying Duck

           /  February 20, 2018

          Sorry – Dupe, but Pati can be in the next office…

          • PartisanZ

             /  February 20, 2018

            We Lefties work ‘open plan’ and holistic HF Duckie, unlike Righties all in tiny pigeonholes and atomization …

            For comparison we have John Key mincing down catwalks and being ‘tricked’ into slippery-bar-of-soap jokes at his expense on HD radio … that’s HD for Highly Dubious …

      • David

         /  February 20, 2018

        “Maybe her job is outlining the issues as she sees them. Maybe part of her job is making people aware. Maybe part of her job is getting people on board.”

        Who is then accountable? How do you measure success or failure?

        Your describing a job role for a communications flunky, or perhaps the head of a campaign group, not a Prime Minister.

        • Gezza

           /  February 20, 2018

          Cranking up Trades Training is what we need. Not Arts.

          • PartisanZ

             /  February 20, 2018

            That’s Right Gezza, the world does not NEED artists, or even artistic trades-people … or any ‘occupation’ who’s ‘value’ can’t easily be measured by simple economic metrics.

            Artists and ‘Creatives’ add nothing to our social fabric …

            • Gezza

               /  February 20, 2018

              We’ve got plenty of Arts students in all the various disciplines within those faculties & many in Community-Tech based art schools & I expect that’ll continue – but we don’t got enuf tradies.

              Artists of all kinds we’ve got plenty of, too. People who enjoy art, music etc. buy their stuff & their music, attend performances according to their taste & cost. I don’t see why you think we don’t need artists. I think they add a great deal to our society.

            • Gezza

               /  February 20, 2018

              Tell you what though, PZ. There’s one group of artists I’d like to see a considerable reduction of in our society. The number of Bullshit Artists. Including, especially, in Parliament.

        • duperez

           /  February 20, 2018

          I get it, a Prime Minister shouldn’t be talking to people she should be ‘doing.’

        • Gezza

           /  February 20, 2018

          The best PM’s these days are usually the best team managers & also usually the best communicators, whether they have a Comms Degree or not. Jacinda is yet to be fully tested as a Team Manager but she comes across to me as doing well in that role so far & the latest poll results certainly vouch for her ability to communicate a vision & direction, at least, that people are currently buying into.

          It’s yet to be seen if her team is capable of delivering meaningful positive results (outcomes) for the majority of voters over their current term in the key areas of housing, roading/transport, crime reduction, state education, health, tax, & supply of better-paid jobs.

        • PartisanZ

           /  February 20, 2018

          You can forget the “better paid jobs”. That train’s been timetabled since 1984 and hasn’t arrived yet. Where the previous government is concerned, scratch housing, roading/transport, crime reduction, state education, health and tax as well … Empty race-card …

          @David – “How do you measure success or failure?”

          Clearly not by ‘bottom-line’ dollars alone, because a bottom-line success can be a social or environmental failure, Right?

          Communication, and its big brother ‘Influence’ is the name of the game nowadays.

          National supporters talking about “accountability” is just stupid …

          • Gezza

             /  February 20, 2018

            Ok, PZ – so you think this Labour-led government will fail to deliver better-paid jobs. That is one of their stated objectives, & I’m not ruling it out yet – although I heard at QT time today that they’re only promising to get the minimum wage up to $20 per hour by 2021! So, that’s not a good sign, I agree.

            On the other matters I mention – housing, roading/transport, crime reduction, state education, health and tax as well – never mind what the last lot failed to do. They’re the Opposition now – as they discover when the poor sods can get dicked around by the “government with no details” in Question Time – so, while they get their act together & figure out how to woo voters back, this current government’s got until late 2020 to do a lot better than the last one & be able to prove it.

  9. David

     /  February 20, 2018

    an audience of middle class offspring getting free money they dont need and being told to find a cure for poverty and inequality.
    “my parents are loaded and i already get an interest free loan to pay for the 25% cost of this degree which will lead to me earning twice the average wage so you just re direct that cash to the needy instead of buying my vote”

    • Blazer

       /  February 20, 2018

      the ‘greedy’ are always….’needy’.

    • David

       /  February 20, 2018

      Perhaps they could all get jobs at Oxfam….

    • PartisanZ

       /  February 20, 2018

      Rich folks could decline student allowances and loans for their late-teen, early-adult offspring, just like rich retirees could decline National Super …

      It’d be the decent thing to do …