Last Refuge? David Shearer's repreated use of the word "patriotism" would be less worrying if it was more inclusive. Unfortunately, the "NZ Inc." approach, rather than advancing policies designed to benefit wage and salary earners across the board, almost always involves extending the state's support to a select group of employers.
“BLOODY IMMIGRANTS, taking our jobs, shouldn’t be allowed!”
That’s how conservative working-class voters, sharing a jug at the Hornby
Working Men’s Club, might’ve put it. But their analysis, for all its pith and
honesty, would’ve been wrong. Immigrants have become an indispensable component
of the New Zealand labour market. Without them our economy would stall. It was
David Shearer’s duty to explain that. As leader of the Labour Party his role is
to counter ignorance with facts, and prejudice with values. In Christchurch
last week he did neither.
In
his speech to the Hornby Working Men’s Club last Thursday, Mr Shearer quite
rightly stated that: “We need to avoid being locked into a downward spiral where
our skilled people go to Australia for better wages, where those people are
replaced by migrants who are paid less, which in turn sends more of our skilled
workers to Australia.”
In
that single sentence the Labour leader encapsulated the grim dynamic of New
Zealand’s labour market. This country’s ability to hold onto its skilled
workers has been very seriously weakened by the power of what is, in effect, a
single Australasian market for
skilled labour.
In this
context New Zealand operates not as a sovereign state, but as an entity
indistinguishable from a state of Australia. The 35 percent-plus premium
Australian employers are willing to pay skilled Kiwis for crossing the Tasman
leaves New Zealand’s government with no option but to replace them with skilled
immigrants for whom New Zealand wages and salaries exercise a similar magnetic
effect.
Mr
Shearer appears to think that limiting the influx of immigrant labour will
somehow slow the exodus of skilled New Zealand workers to Australia. But it
won’t. Australia’s borders remain open, and so long as that remains the case
the cleverest and most talented Kiwis will continue to fly.
And
if the efforts of the New Zealand government to meet the rising demand for skilled
labour (driven in large measure by the Christchurch re-build) are to be scaled
back, and the inflow of immigrants choked-off, then the economy will also
suffocate.
At
the core of the problems Mr Shearer identifies in his speech is the depressed
levels of New Zealand wages and salaries. One way to address this would be to
simply prohibit the emigration of skilled New Zealand workers. That would, of
course, require New Zealand to become a totalitarian state – a solution most of
us would reject out-of-hand. The other alternative is to substantially lift New
Zealanders’ incomes.
The
interesting question, therefore, is why Mr Shearer offered his staunchly Labour
audience so little in the way of concrete measures for lifting wages and
salaries. A careful reading of his speech reveals that increased incomes have
been relegated to mere aspirations: something Labour would like to see; expects
to see; but will do nothing beyond a modest increase in the minimum wage to
achieve.
This
means that any Labour Government led by Mr Shearer is likely to shy away from
direct interventions in the labour market. It will not pass legislation
designed to reverse the flow of wealth from wage and salary earners to owners
and shareholders. It will not, by substantially lifting the minimum wage,
engineer a wholesale winnowing-out of New Zealand’s most inefficient
businesses. It will not pass legislation restoring universal union membership
or the national award system. It will not use the Government’s ability to set
wages and salaries in the public sector to provide both a guide and a goad for
private sector employers. In short, it will not do any of the things required
to raise the incomes of New Zealand’s wage and salary-earners.
What
Mr Shearer did do, however, was promise all kinds of direct aid and assistance
to New Zealand Incorporated. “It’s time we got proud”, he said, “time we got
patriotic. It’s time we backed New Zealand, instead of taking our hands off the
wheel.”
But
Mr Shearer’s patriotism is selective. State assistance goes only to exporters.
Direct intervention in the labour market extends only as far as limiting the
inflow of immigrants. And Labour’s promise of improved living standards, by way
of “high-skill, high wage” jobs, continues to follow the example of the White
Queen’s employment contract in Through
The Looking-Glass and What Alice Found There: “The rule is, jam tomorrow
and jam yesterday – but never jam today.”
What
the audience gathered at the Hornby Working Men’s Club deserved to hear from Mr
Shearer was an acknowledgement that Labour’s challenges are specific and
immediate. To raise incomes by re-empowering working people and redistributing
wealth. To make New Zealand a place where the diversity of its population is a
source of strength and pride, not an opportunity for mistrust and division. To
create a community of values, where loyalty is owed not to flags – but
principles.
This essay was originally published in The
Press of Tuesday, 23 October 2012.
