Provincial Growth Fund – jobs created

National MP Paul Goldsmith asked Minister for Regional Development Shane Jones questions about job creation in Parliament yesterday:

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he accept the figures of the latest household labour force survey, which showed that while New Zealand was creating 10,000 jobs per month under the last two years of the National Government, over the past three months it’s created only 667 jobs per month; and if so, does he think the Provincial Growth Fund will compensate for that massive reduction in job creation?

Hon SHANE JONES: On the question of jobs, as the first citizen of the provinces, I look at things through the spyglass of optimism. And the reality is that, as we make our allocation decisions, these projects and these capital investments take time to fully roll out. But I have sought additional advice, and very shortly I will provide a figure both to the House and to public, which is inversely related to the gibberish I had from that member around about Waitangi time.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he accept that if job growth had continued at the same pace that it had under National, there would have been an extra 28,000 jobs created in the past three months in this country; and is the Provincial Growth Fund in any way compensating for that lost opportunity for Kiwis?

Hon SHANE JONES: Obviously, the Provincial Growth Fund is really premised on the notion of provincial futures, and I have had precious little time to think about those dim, bleak times that he refers to.

Comment from Gezza:


Provincial Champion, Shane Jones corrects the record on PGF job numbers
(Actually, it’s more of a case of he says he finally now has a record of job numbers)

Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones has told 1 NEWS that 560 jobs have been generated so far by the Provincial Growth Fund. It comes several weeks after National’s Economic and Regional Development spokesperson Paul Goldsmith claimed the fund had only created 54 jobs.

Mr Jones admits he wasn’t tracking the number properly, but says officials have now done a ring-around and are promising regular updates. “[It’s] 10 times larger than the miserable figure that my National opposition character [in] Epsom sulks, Mr Goldsmith was tossing around,” he said.

The Minister says the 560 figure is made up of both part-time and full-time jobs, and does not include contractors, trainees or bureaucrats.

More…

1 News at 6 video clip embedded
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/exclusive-govts-3b-provincial-growth-fund-generates-560-jobs-good-start-towards-10k-promise?variant=tb_v_1


So 560 is all jobs working any number of hours, not the Full Time Equivalent that is often given for job numbers.

It’s early days yet for the Provincial Growth Fund. ‘Only’ $650 million of the three year budget of $3 billion has been handed out so far.

Time will tell how many jobs are created through investment from the fund – total and FTE – and more time will tell how many of those jobs are not short term. It’s possible that once the fiunding runs out that some jobs won’t be financially sustainable.

 

Meanwhile the US economy continues to thrive

Despite all the political turmoil and President Trump’s confrontational and divisory approach the US economy continues to do very well, but there are some warning signs

The US share market is easing off record highs – the boom there may be a good sign, but could also pose future risks of a big bust.

Market Watch:  Job creation, wages slip in September as unemployment falls to 48-year low

The U.S. unemployment rate sank to a 48-year low of 3.7% in September as the economy added 134,000 new jobs, setting the stage for a strong holiday season to finish out what’s been stellar year for the U.S. economy.

The increase in hiring was the smallest in 12 months and below the recent trend, perhaps reflecting the effects of Hurricane Florence. Economists polled by MarketWatch had forecast a 168,000 increase.

Yet the increase in new jobs was enough to lower the unemployment rate to 3.7% from 3.9%. The last time the jobless rate was lower was in December 1969 — when the first man walked on the moon.

Many economists predict the jobless rate will fall even further in the months ahead.

Reuters:  U.S. job growth cools; unemployment rate drops to 3.7 percent

U.S. job growth slowed sharply in September likely as Hurricane Florence depressed restaurant and retail payrolls, but the unemployment rate fell to near a 49-year low of 3.7 percent, pointing to a further tightening in labor market conditions.

“The weaker gain in payrolls in September may partly reflect some hit from Hurricane Florence,” said Michael Pearce, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics in New York. “There is little in this report to stop the Fed continuing to raise interest rates gradually.”

Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said on Tuesday that the economy’s outlook was “remarkably positive” and he believed it was on the cusp of a “historically rare” era of ultra-low unemployment and tame inflation.

Bloomberg:  Powell Heaps Trump-Like Praise on Economy as Rate Hikes Loom

In what Fed watchers say was unprecedented four public appearances over the past week, Powell repeatedly lauded the economy’s performance, calling it “remarkably positive,” “extraordinary” and “particularly bright.” And he said he expected the good times to continue.

“Interest rates are still accommodative, but we’re gradually moving to a place where they’ll be neutral,” neither holding back nor spurring economic growth, Powell said. “We may go past neutral. But we’re a long way from neutral at this point, probably,” he added.

The Fed raised its interest-rate target range last week to 2 percent to 2.25 percent.

Breaking with decades of presidential precedence, Trump has repeatedly criticized the Fed in recent months for raising rates. His latest salvo came on Sept. 26, just hours after Powell and his colleagues boosted rates for the third time this year.

Asked by veteran television anchor Judy Woodruff for his response to Trump’s outbursts, Powell replied, “My focus is essentially on controlling the controllable”.

The current economic expansion is already the second-longest in history, trailing only the 10-year period of the 1990s. If it continues, it will surpass that upturn next year.

But one trend should be of concern, US Government Debt:

Today the Federal Debt is about $21,605,363,414,469.16.

The amount is the gross outstanding debt issued by the United States Department of the Treasury since 1790 and reported here.

But, it doesn’t include state and local debt.

And, it doesn’t include so-called “agency debt.”

And, it doesn’t include the so-called unfunded liabilities of entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.

Forbes: Why The Federal Deficit Isn’t Cause For Panic… Yet

If you’re reading this, then it probably means you have also watched pundits scream at the top of their lungs about the impending doom brought about by the US deficit. Numbers like $20 Trillion are enough to scare anyone, so concern is warranted, however, panic is not.

The federal government is projected to add $985 billion to the federal deficit during fiscal year 2019. That’s because the government plans to spend over $4.4 trillion dollars, while bringing in only $3.42 trillion dollars. Nearly $400 Billion of the spending will go to service debt that’s already accrued over the years and that figure will only rise as interest rates increase.

While those numbers are astonishing and difficult to really wrap your mind around, it’s not as bad as it sounds. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s) Budget and Economic Outlook: 2018 to 2028, “In CBO’s baseline projections, which incorporate the assumption that current laws governing taxes and spending generally remain unchanged, the federal budget deficit grows substantially over the next few years. Later on, between 2023 and 2028, it stabilizes in relation to the size of the economy, though at a high level by historical standards.”

Now I said not to panic earlier, because there are a number of adjustments and scenarios that will let the U.S. keep borrowing and spending long after any individual would have had their credit cards canceled. That said, at some point time will run out and our options to fix the situation will be less and less friendly. It’s the equivalent of waiting until you’re in the hospital to make lifestyle adjustments. By then, it might be too late.

The Baltimore Sun: U.S. debt addiction threatens national security

Arising China. An emboldened Russia. A nuclear Iran. Cyberwarfare. Ask a defense expert to name America’s biggest security concerns, and one of these will likely top the list.

These threats are real, of course. But one of the biggest dangers to our nation isn’t a hostile foreign actor. It’s a domestic one — our leaders’ addiction to debt.

The U.S. national debt is rising unsustainably. The Pentagon recently has been asking for more money, and Congress has been inclined to give it to them. Absent dramatic reform, national security will soon take a back seat to mandatory debt service.

The Hill: Congress approved $2.4 trillion in additional debt during fiscal year 2018: Watchdog

Congress approved $2.4 trillion in debt during fiscal year 2018, according to an analysis published this week by the watchdog group Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CFRB).

Trump administration officials have insisted that the tax law will ultimately bring down the deficit due to economic growth, a conclusion that’s been rejected by many budget watchers as well as some official bodies.

“At a time when debt is already at record-high levels and growing unsustainably, the $2.4 trillion added to the projected debt over the past year is incredibly irresponsible,” CFRB wrong in a blog post. “These changes alone will increase projected debt from 86 percent of GDP to 94 percent.”

Trump is used to taking big financial risks in business, but the financial health of the United States as well as the world are at stake. If things crash it won’t be as easy to walk away as it has been from his business failures.

If the New Zealand Government was increasing debt here to anything like 86% or 94% of GDP they would be strongly and widely criticised, for good reason. But for some reason business leaning pundits don’t seem to care about those levels of debt in the US, they hail the economy there as great.

Minimum wage rise versus jobs

The effect that the raising of the minimum wage might have on jobs has often been argued but never been proven. It depends on a number of factors, like how much the minimum is raised, and what the business and employment situation is like at the time.

Government officials have warned that the latest increase, due to come into effect next week (1 April), could jeopardise up to 3,000 jobs but the Minister of Workplace Relations disagrees.

NZ Herald: Minimum wage rise to $16.50 at the end of next week could cost 3000 jobs, says MBIE

Government officials say lifting the minimum wage to $16.50 an hour could see a loss of up to 3000 jobs.

Boosting the minimum wage was part of the Government’s 100-day plan and is set to take effect at the end of next week, on April 1.

In its regulatory impact statement, officials from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment said an increase “may have negative employment impacts which include lower job growth and reduced work hours”.

“The estimated restraint on employment for a minimum wage of $16.50 is 3000,” the statement said.

It also noted that the effect on employment “is heavily debated in economic literature … there is no clear consensus”.

And the Minister, Iain Galloway, debates their warning.

Workplace Relations Minister Iain Lees-Galloway said workers had not had a fair share of economic growth, and the boost to the minimum wage was only one part of the Government’s strategy.

“The Government considers advice alongside a range of other factors, including prior experience increasing the minimum wage – which has always been positive.

“I note that Treasury also advised the best time to raise the minimum wage is while the labour market is strong and tightening.

“Treasury forecasts that the unemployment rate will keep falling towards 4 per cent over the next three years, and that average wages will rise on average at about 3 per cent a year over that time, due to a tight labour market.”

So Lees-Galloway seems to be dismissing the MBIE advice, and choosing to use different Treasury advice to support the increase.

This is a fairly modest increase in the minimum wage, from $15.75 to $16.50, but bigger increases are planned.

Labour and New Zealand First have agreed to increase the minimum wage to $20 an hour by April 2021.

One could guess that MBIE may have further job loss warnings if it is bumped up more.

And what if in the future Treasury advises that the labour market is no longer strong and tightening? Would the Government go against that advice?

They already have, last month. Stuff: Labour warned if economy turns, minimum wage plans will hit the young and unskilled

Treasury is urging the Government to ditch its plan to abolish the youth rate, warning that minimum wage pledges will hit the prospects of younger, unskilled workers if the economy cools.

Advice from Treasury officials released under the Official Information Act shows Treasury expressing concerns that a commitment to a substantial increase in the minimum could harming the prospects of the very people the rate was meant to protect.

While Treasury explicitly said it supported hiking the minimum wage by 75 cents an hour to $16.50 in April, as the economy and labour market would see little impact, officials warned the three-year plan to get the minimum wage to $20 could have a series of unintended consequences.

These ranged from hurting the local economy in already slow growth regions, the risk that once New Zealand’s minimum wage was on a par with Australia’s, fewer young, low-skilled worker would cross the Tasman for work and that higher minimum wages “has been shown” to attract young people to leave education to enter the workforce.

Lees-Galloway has been quite selective in picking advice to justify Government policy.

He was a Nurses’ Organisation organiser (aka a union official) prior to becoming an MP,

UK & Europe – Brexit financial impact

Topics about the UK, EU and Europe. Article 50 (Brexit) formally triggered.

UK-EU

An impact of Brexit could be the loss of ” euro-denominated clearing” from London.


Guardian: Up to 100,000 UK jobs at risk as Merkel and Juncker ally warns on euro clearing

The future of an estimated 100,000 jobs has been plunged into doubt after a close political ally of the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and president of the European commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, warned that a prized sector in the City of London must relocate to EU soil after Brexit.

Manfred Weber, the leader of the centre-right European people’s party – the largest political group in the European parliament, to which both the German chancellor and the commission president belong – told reporters that euro-denominated clearing could no longer be undertaken in the City when the UK leaves the EU.

“EU citizens decide on their own money,” Weber said during a press conference in Strasbourg on Tuesday. “When the UK is leaving the European Union it is not thinkable that at the end the whole euro business is managed in London. This is an external place, this is not an EU place any more. The euro business should be managed on EU soil.”

Such a development would be a huge blow to the British economy. Six months ago, the head of the London Stock Exchange, Xavier Rolet, said at least 100,000 positions could be lost if the City’s clearing houses lost their ability to process euro-denominated transactions.

Clearing houses are independent parties that sit between the two parties in a trade and are tasked with managing the risk if one side defaults on payment. London clears around three-quarters of all euro-denominated trades.

Brexit was always going to have some down sides for the UK.

Treasury forecasts

Bill English will have a sound financial foundation to build his government on.  The latest Treasury forecasts were released today (by English).

  • Economic growth – 3% average over the next five years
  • Unemployment to drop to 4.3% by 2020/21
  • 150,000 jobs to be created
  • Average wage to increase by $7,500 to $66,000

Treasury forecasts solid growth, stable finances

Treasury’s latest forecasts show the Government’s programme of responsible economic and fiscal management is delivering benefits for New Zealanders, Finance Minister Bill English says.

“Economic growth is expected to average around 3 per cent over the next five years – considerably stronger than forecast in Budget 2016 – supporting more jobs, falling unemployment and higher incomes,” Mr English says.

“The more positive outlook for the economy is driven by high levels of construction activity, exports (particularly tourism), a growing population and low interest rates.”

The 2016 Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update forecasts unemployment to  drop to 4.3 per cent by 2020/21. Over the same period Treasury expects another 150,000 jobs to be created and the average wage to increase by $7,500 to $66,000.

“While the recent Kaikoura earthquakes have had a major impact on affected families and businesses, they are not expected to disrupt the overall momentum of the economy,” Mr English says.

“However, the earthquakes do highlight the importance of paying off debt in the good times so that the Government can support New Zealand communities in challenging times.”

Treasury estimates the total fiscal cost of the earthquakes will be about $2 billion to $3 billion, some of which will be funded by insurance proceeds or existing funds. Net costs of $1 billion have been included in this year’s forecasts.

The operating balance before gains and losses (OBEGAL) is forecast to be $473 million in surplus this year, rising to $8.5 billion over the forecast period.

The Half Year Update shows net debt peaked as a proportion of GDP in 2015/16 – a year earlier than previously expected – and is expected to fall to 18.8 per cent of GDP by 2020/21.

Mr English says the accompanying Budget Policy Statement confirms the operating allowance will remain at $1.5 billion for each of the next four Budgets.

The capital allowance for Budget 2016 has been increased from $900 million to $3 billion in Budget 2017 and to $2 billion in future Budgets to provide for a number of high quality infrastructure and investment projects.

Contributions to the NZ Super Fund are forecast to restart in 2020/21 once net debt falls below 20 per cent of GDP.

The Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update and Budget Policy Statement can be found hereand here.

Aus effect on NZ immigration numbers

In contrast to confused claims by Winston Peters that the movement of Kiwis back to New Zealand is due to being treated as second class citizens in Australia but that New Zealand is “a last resort”, Liam Dann supports his opinion with reason – it’s mostly about the economies.

Liam Dann: Oz fortunes a big factor in arrivals wave

…it isn’t hard to draw a link between Australia’s economy and our current immigration boom.

New Zealand’s net migration gain of 68,400 in the year to May 2016 was a nominal record dating back to at least 1860.

We’ve never, even in colonial times, gained so many new residents in a year. There have been much bigger percentage gains of course.

Even on that basis, the past year has been huge.

While there is a lot of focus on Chinese home buyers, it is New Zealanders coming home (and not leaving) that has made the difference.

Compared to the May 2012 year, departures to Australia have a fallen from 48,000 to 20,000. Arrivals have spiked from 8800 to 16,800.

So the biggest shift is in far fewer Kiwis heading to Australia in the first place, but more are returning than before as well.

We even had a net gain of 1700 Australian citizens.

They can’t be, as Peters puts it, “second class citizens” in Australia. There will be a variety of reasons for them coming here but “last resort” is unlikely to be one.

The open borders have always made the lure of Australia our biggest immigration variable. And it is one that can swing sharply.

And it’s something that the Government cannot and should not control.

The end of the mining boom, an economic slowdown and the inclusion of Kiwi residents in tough immigration laws that allow for detainment and deportation based on “bad character” tests have dramatically reversed the flow of transtasman migration.

The biggest factor is availability of jobs, or lack of availability.

How long will this trend last? Is our relative economic success a driver? Or is migration driving our economic success?

If Australia’s economy or political policies change radically then our migration story will too.

We need to ensure we have social policy to protect people from losing out and turning their anger towards migrants.

Anger towards migrants that is deliberately stoked by Peters for political purposes. That’s very poor for an MP.

We need to remember the current surge is not driven just by the more highly visible arrivals of different culture and ethnicity.

It is being driven by New Zealand passport holders.

History tells us this wave will not last. And that when it passes it will have left this country richer and stronger.

As long as politicians like Peters don’t drag us down.

It didn’t just happen

A misleading Martyn Bradbury headline: That thing Key promised was unlikely to happen with the TPPA just happened

Beyond the spin that NZers would have a say about the TPPA, beyond the lies of how much money it will make us, beyond the fact it’s an American geopolitical strategy to counter China in the pacific – is the terrifying reality that the TPPA opens NZ up to foreign corporations suing us if domestic law costs them money.

Key say’s it’s unlikely to happen – it just did.

Except that it didn’t just happen under the TPPA.

The thing that is happening between Canada and the US is under the North American Free Trade Agreement and has nothing to do with the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, which hasn’t yet been signed or ratified and hasn’t come into effect yet.

Bradbury goes on to sort of acknowledge this…

…by signing the TPPA and having it ratified by the necessary members John Key is signing away our ability to pass domestic law without costing us millions in legal fees and opening us up to potentially massive damage claims from unscrupulous corporates.

But as we know Bradbury’s frantic ranting is hard to take seriously. He is in the ‘trade deal bad’ and ‘corporation bad’ club.

I wonder how many members of the unions who support The Daily Blog (presumably financially) owe their employment to corporations?

And I wonder how many of them owe their employment to trade deals?

I suspect the jobs of some members of the Rail and Maritime Transport Union are at least partly reliant on imports and exports that happen because of trade deals.

Garner: Jobs for the boys

Duncan Garner has tweeted () National’s jobs for the boys.

  1. Tim Groser to Washington shortly.
  2. David Carter to London (last time I asked him if he was set to be Speaker – he lied to my face)
  3. Gerry Brownlee to become Speaker. (Later knighted)

“I don’t guess in this game mate.”

For that it’s fair to give him a plug:

@RadioLIVENZ Drive from 3pm weekdays ‘where content is always king.’

Poll – top 5 election issues

Colmar Brunton have polled on what people think are the  ‘top 5 issues’, with education and health head of the rest

Poverty and inequality are there but not as prominent as some may think.

It’s interesting that education is the top rated issue, especially as National’s Hekia Parata struggled with her education portfolio at the start of the term. John Key had faith in her ability, and that may turn out to be a significant election factor.

A notable absence from the list is the economy, which is something many claim to be a major deciding factor.

Asset sales may be fading in importance.

Clint’s trendy job chart criticised

Green’s Hey Clint published a manufacturing jobs chart on Twitter which he claimed showed trends. There are a number of problems with it.

@ClintVSmith: Here’s an update on manufacturing jobs under National

Charting purists jumped on an obvious point.

@keith_ng: Starting the axis at 160k for an area-based representation. GRRR. #cheating

@hamiskofoed: you have misrepresented that graph with the jobs number starting at $160k. U should correct it and re tweet

@sakkaden: you have misrepresented that graph with the jobs number starting at $160k. U should correct it and re tweet

@sakkaden: I do this for a living. Use a line graph if omitting zero. Amputated bars are a high school level failure.

@isaacfreedom: Vertical axis should start at zero, otherwise you exaggerate proportion of change, which isn’t cool.

Clint defended his choice of scale and bars but accepted the criticism.

I had it as a line graph but annoying to make part red part blue in excel.

Zero not compulsory, scale narrower so u can c trend still down. shld hv been line but multi-colour line hard in excel

Next time i’ll do line, as with the previous graphs I’ve done on this topics.

So here’s what it looks like as a line graph.

Manufacturing QES line scaledHmmm, does the trend look like it’s changing? Here it is with the full height Axis, which is less dramatic.

Manufacturing QES unscaledThe visual trend there looks like jobs have dropped a bit with our recession followed by the Global Financial Crisis plus two major Christchurch earthquakes and it has leveled off – with possibly the start of a very modest recovery.

This is what Clint said about it:

The trend since the recession ended is -500 jobs per quarter

My count is from start of the GFC, mid 2008, when manu jobs went from steady ~230 to ~190K in a year.

When did the recession end? According to Wikipedia:

The financial crisis of 2007–2008, also known as the Global Financial Crisis and 2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

The crisis played a significant role in the failure of key businesses, declines in consumer wealth estimated in trillions of U.S. dollars, and a downturn in economic activity leading to the 2008–2012 global recession.

To my eye manufacturing jobs bottomed out in 2012 and since then is a hint of recovery.

Yeah, it’s the lack of recovery, in fact, continued decline, that’s the problem

It doesn’t look like a continuing decline to me. And blaming it on National is a bit picky, the rest of the world has seen a manufacturing decline through the recession. Australia:

It represents a hollowing-out of traditional manufacturing in Australia, with the sector now accounting for just 6 per cent to 7 per cent of economic output. Employment in the sector fell by 140,000, or 13 per cent, between the year 2000 and November last year. New South Wales lost 52,900 jobs, or 18.5 per cent of its manufacturing workforce over the 13-year period. Victoria was hit even harder. It shed 95,100 jobs, more than 29 per cent of its manufacturing workforce.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/australia-needs-to-smarten-up-its-act-with-manufacturing-exports-20140214-32ref.html

Australia is yet to be hit by the closure of major car manufacturing plants which will result in a further 50,000 job losses.

So what does the overall job trend look like?

All jobs QESCherry picking data and choosing a chart style to suit making a point is easy.  But there’s a lot more to job trends than a Green political diss.

Greens have been proposing Green jobs, in part through manufacturing green energy thingies. There’s a bit of that happening but it can be a very expensive sector to invest in. And it’s very difficult competing in manufacturing with China and India, as the rest of the world is finding.

green job, also called a green-collar job is, according to the United Nations Environment Program, “work in agricultural, manufacturing, research and development (R&D), administrative, and service activities that contribute(s) substantially to preserving or restoring environmental quality.

Specifically, but not exclusively, this includes jobs that help to protect ecosystems and biodiversity; reduce energy, materials, and water consumption through high efficiency strategies; de-carbonize the economy; and minimize or altogether avoid generation of all forms of waste and pollution.

Green Party Green jobs:

We have a practical economic plan that creates decent jobs, adds resilience to our economy, and protects our natural environment. It is a plan for clean green prosperity for all New Zealanders.

Our plan will create 100,000 new jobs through direct government investment in housing, by ensuring our state-owned energy companies capture the massive export opportunities in the renewable energy sector, and, most importantly, by shifting the drivers for green jobs in the private sector

How are they going to do it?

Our plan is detailed and fully-costed. It includes plans for direct government investment, building sustainable infrastructure, supporting the greening of our small and medium enterprises (SMEs), driving innovation, introducing smarter regulation, getting the prices of resources and pollution right, protecting our brand, reforming capital markets, making our workplaces fairer, and measuring progress differently.

So far it’s very vague and idealistic. Some Green ‘highlights’:

Direct investment
We will ramp-up the Heat Smart home insulation programme ensuring it is rolled out to a further 200,000 homes over the next three years, costing $350 million and employing 4,000 people directly — 10,400 if you include indirect and upstream employment effects.

That’s an extension of a scheme that’s been running for several years. It’s not clear how many additional jobs would be created by a Green ‘ramp-up’.

From my own experience it can be as cost effective doing this without a Government subsidy because that is inflating prices. I bought a heat pump at least as cheaply as I would have if I used a subsidy and I had more choice doing it through the open market.

Keep it Kiwi
We will retain ownership of our state-owned enterprises while creating the right incentives for them to partner with clean tech entrepreneurs in the private sector and develop renewable energy solutions that we can patent and export abroad. With the right incentives in place, if we can capture just 1% of the global market for renewable energy solutions, we’ll create a $6 to $8 billion export industry employing 47,000–65,000 people in new green jobs.

Very idealistic and vague. This would require large Government investment in high risk enterprises. If it was a viable market it would be happening of it’s own accord – green tech has often proven to be very expensive.

Support for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises
Through a mix of government procurement policies, tax incentives, start-up funding, and a $1 billion boost to R&D funding, we’ll support SMEs to step up and rive new job creation in the cleantech sector.

More idealistic vagueness. See 100,000 green jobs for New Zealanders (PDF) –

I welcome a chart from Clint showing projected job growth through these policies over the next (say) ten years. Here is another  Green graphic:

Wind power. Apart from the obvious problem that wind power must work alongside other power generation to cover times that not enough wind is blowing (some of the coldest time in winter is calm and frosty weather) there is a an ironic issue – environmental protest.

Wind power plan cancelled

Meridian Energy has decided not to go ahead with their plan to put 176 wind turbines in Central Otago. Local people set up a protest group. This group has spent a lot of time and money fighting to stop Meridian Energy for the last six years.

An earlier plan by Meridian Energy for hydro power from the Waitaki River in Otago was cancelled in 2004, partly because of protests from local groups.

Would a Green government ban environmental protesters so they can proceed with green energy projects?

I’m sure Greens could create some green jobs – at a cost. But it will be challenging to do it in an economically sustainable way – a lot more difficult than adding a Green line (or blocks) to a campaign chart.