Counting on the census
One of the great pillars on which modern New Zealand society is based has been scrapped by the government in a move which has shocked many.
The five-yearly, or thereabouts, census has seemingly had its day, Statistics Minister Shane Reti reckons.
He announced on Wednesday that New Zealanders had, for the last time, needed to scurry about looking for a pen to fill out the forms or pray that the more recently online documents would work as intended.
Citing the need to save time and money, Dr Reti signalled the census will be replaced with "a smaller annual survey and targeted data collection".
This will, according to the somewhat breathless Beehive media release, provide better quality economic data to underpin the government's "growth agenda".
In line with this thinking, there will be no census in 2028, with the new approach starting in 2030.
The new method of collecting nationwide statistics will sharpen the focus on delivering "more timely insights into New Zealand's population", the minister reckons. Good luck with that.
While we should not automatically kibosh something before it has had a chance to prove its worth, it is difficult to see how what may effectively be a scattergun approach will be superior to the system which has developed over more than 170 years.
The census has, of course, never been perfect. There were well-publicised issues with the 2018 and 2023 counts, and the five-yearly spacing has been interrupted several times, due to such events as the Depression, World War 2 and the Christchurch earthquake in February 2011.
There were also concerns about the robustness of responses when the 2023 census was held the month after Cyclone Gabrielle.
Dr Reti also has some justification for being concerned about the cost of the census, which has ballooned during the past decade.
According to government figures, the 2013 census cost $104 million, but outlay for the 2023 one was $325m, and the now-ditched 2028 one was expected to cost around $400m.
The huge leap in price is certainly concerning. Based on those government numbers, there can be no doubt running a census is a very expensive business.
However, we need to remember, and perhaps remind the government, that the policies which are meant to benefit everyone across the country in healthcare, education, housing, transport and so on, actually cost many billions of dollars.
The price-tag for a census which informs those policies is definitely not chicken feed, but money generally well-spent.
Reaction to this week's announcement has largely been negative and expressing surprise at the move.
There is particular concern about how cherry-picking data and using smaller sample sets will affect the rigour of information about Māori and Pasifika communities, and also people with disabilities, rainbow communities, and smaller ethnic groups.
Dr Reti's promised land of a "sharpened focus on quality" when it comes to statistics will be extremely difficult to achieve.
There are crucial questions to answer around how people's existing data within government agencies will be appropriately and sensitively used, who decides what to use and when, and who will oversee the process to make sure it is as comprehensive and fair as such a potentially fraught new system can be.
We are uneasy that this move appears to be another example of this government not being especially interested in the science or data necessary for good decision-making and for making policy which is evidence-based, instead careening ever-more wildly across the political landscape in pursuit of zealotry-driven outcomes.
We unapologetically support the census system we had, and believe in the provision of proper statistical data sets for modern-day needs and as a source of valuable information for the historians of the future
Beware the old saying: "Garbage in, garbage out."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
4 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Sentencing reforms come into effect as govt targets crime
By Natalie Akoorie of RNZ Sentencing reforms which will cap discounts judges can give to an offender and introduce aggravating factors at sentencing, have come into effect as the government targets tougher crime consequences. The Labour Party says the move will only exacerbate an already clogged court system, add huge costs to the taxpayer by increasing the prison population, and will not reduce crime or the number of victims. But Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the sentencing reforms, which came into effect on Sunday, were about restoring real consequences for crime. Communities and hardworking New Zealanders should not be made to live and work in fear of criminals who had a "flagrant disregard for the law, corrections officers and the general public", he said. "We know that undue leniency has resulted in a loss of public confidence in sentencing, and our justice system as a whole. We had developed a culture of excuses." The tougher stance was part of the government's plan to "restore law and order, which we know is working", he said. "It signals to victims that they deserve justice, and that they are our priority." The changes include: • Capping sentence discounts when considering mitigating factors • Preventing repeat discounts for youth and remorse • Introducing aggravating factors at sentencing for offences against sole charge workers and those whose home and business are interconnected • Encouraging the use of cumulative sentencing when someone commits a crime on bail, in custody or on parole • Requiring courts to take victims' needs and interests into account at sentencing Act backs reforms Act MP Nicole McKee welcomed the new rules saying there had been a steady erosion of public confidence in the justice system. "Offenders faced fewer and shorter prison sentences, while communities paid the price." She said police data showed a 134 percent increase in serious assault leading to injury from 2017 to 2023 under "Labour's failed experiment of being kind to criminals". "We've restored Three Strikes, and from today additional measures are coming into force to make the message even clearer." She said the vulnerability of people who worked alone or in a business attached to their home would be "recognised in law" thanks to Act's coalition agreement to crack down on retail crime with the introduction of the aggravating factors. 'Smart on crime' Labour's spokesperson for Justice Duncan Webb, however, said tough on crime sounded good but did not actually have the effect of reducing crime. "We've got to be smart on crime as well. We've got to address the causes of crime which we know are poverty, family violence, mental illness and addiction, and until we address those, there'll continue to be crime and there'll continue to be victims." Tougher sentences were just one option, he said. "If we're gonna be serious about reducing crime and reducing harm, we've got to address those causes of crime." Evidence showed tough on crime initiatives such as the Three Strikes law, which the government had reinstated, did not reduce victims, Webb said. "Victims are absolutely central to the approach and the best thing we could ever have is avoiding someone becoming a victim and that means addressing the causes of crime before crime occurs. "And absolutely I understand that when people are victims of crime they want to see the perpetrator punished and that's the right thing to happen, but I'd rather see the appropriate amount of resources put into mental health, reducing poverty, [and] eliminating homelessness, because those are things that create crime and we've seen them all increase under this government." The fact white collar crime such as fraud - which was one of the few crimes that responded to deterrents - was not captured by Three Strikes was inconsistent, Webb said. Webb said he had sought feedback from those in the social services, intervention, and criminal justice sectors. "They're all frustrated with the fact the direction that's being taken is going to clog up the courts, it's going to create more offenders, it's going to create more victims and it's not actually going to address what we really want to address which is the things that cause crime."
Otago Daily Times
4 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Sentencing reforms to 'restore law and order' come into effect
By Natalie Akoorie of RNZ Sentencing reforms which will cap discounts judges can give to an offender and introduce aggravating factors at sentencing, have come into effect as the government targets tougher crime consequences. The Labour Party says the move will only exacerbate an already clogged court system, add huge costs to the taxpayer by increasing the prison population, and will not reduce crime or the number of victims. But Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the sentencing reforms, which came into effect on Sunday, were about restoring real consequences for crime. Communities and hardworking New Zealanders should not be made to live and work in fear of criminals who had a "flagrant disregard for the law, corrections officers and the general public", he said. "We know that undue leniency has resulted in a loss of public confidence in sentencing, and our justice system as a whole. We had developed a culture of excuses." The tougher stance was part of the government's plan to "restore law and order, which we know is working", he said. "It signals to victims that they deserve justice, and that they are our priority." The changes include: • Capping sentence discounts when considering mitigating factors • Preventing repeat discounts for youth and remorse • Introducing aggravating factors at sentencing for offences against sole charge workers and those whose home and business are interconnected • Encouraging the use of cumulative sentencing when someone commits a crime on bail, in custody or on parole • Requiring courts to take victims' needs and interests into account at sentencing Act backs reforms Act MP Nicole McKee welcomed the new rules saying there had been a steady erosion of public confidence in the justice system. "Offenders faced fewer and shorter prison sentences, while communities paid the price." She said police data showed a 134 percent increase in serious assault leading to injury from 2017 to 2023 under "Labour's failed experiment of being kind to criminals". "We've restored Three Strikes, and from today additional measures are coming into force to make the message even clearer." She said the vulnerability of people who worked alone or in a business attached to their home would be "recognised in law" thanks to Act's coalition agreement to crack down on retail crime with the introduction of the aggravating factors. 'Smart on crime' Labour's spokesperson for Justice Duncan Webb, however, said tough on crime sounded good but did not actually have the effect of reducing crime. "We've got to be smart on crime as well. We've got to address the causes of crime which we know are poverty, family violence, mental illness and addiction, and until we address those, there'll continue to be crime and there'll continue to be victims." Tougher sentences were just one option, he said. "If we're gonna be serious about reducing crime and reducing harm, we've got to address those causes of crime." Evidence showed tough on crime initiatives such as the Three Strikes law, which the government had reinstated, did not reduce victims, Webb said. "Victims are absolutely central to the approach and the best thing we could ever have is avoiding someone becoming a victim and that means addressing the causes of crime before crime occurs. "And absolutely I understand that when people are victims of crime they want to see the perpetrator punished and that's the right thing to happen, but I'd rather see the appropriate amount of resources put into mental health, reducing poverty, [and] eliminating homelessness, because those are things that create crime and we've seen them all increase under this government." The fact white collar crime such as fraud - which was one of the few crimes that responded to deterrents - was not captured by Three Strikes was inconsistent, Webb said. Webb said he had sought feedback from those in the social services, intervention, and criminal justice sectors. "They're all frustrated with the fact the direction that's being taken is going to clog up the courts, it's going to create more offenders, it's going to create more victims and it's not actually going to address what we really want to address which is the things that cause crime."
Scoop
9 hours ago
- Scoop
Q+A Panel Confirms Why Local Government Needs Real Change
Responding to this morning's episode of TVNZ's Q+A, ACT's Local Government spokesperson Cameron Luxton says the panel made the case for change better than ACT ever could: 'If anyone's wondering why ratepayers face crushing rates hikes, crumbling infrastructure, and endless division, just listen to the views being defended around the council table. This panel put it on full display. 'The four outgoing councillors sounded like they'd been swallowed whole by collective groupthink, completely ignoring the people who actually pay the bills. 'They claimed it's dishonest to promise rates restraint – but clearly haven't met ACT Local candidates. Ratepayers see local councils that are bloated, wasteful, and addicted to vanity projects. ACT Local councillors will get back to basics: roads, rubbish, and reliable water infrastructure. 'ACT councillors will do what ratepayers and businesses have been forced to do for years – take the chainsaw to pet projects and 'nice-to-haves' that have nothing to do with core services. That includes scrapping councils' ideological obsession with expensive speed bumps and cycleways, and actually listening to the people who pay rates. 'In central government, ACT is making this easier for councils by pushing RMA reform, fixing infrastructure funding and financing, exploring GST sharing with councils, and developing regional deals. 'Then there's Māori wards. Every panelist backed race-based seats or automatic places for mana whenua with no democratic accountability. Labour deliberately rewrote the law so only some New Zealanders can vote for certain candidates based on who their great-grandparents were without opportunity for the local community to object to this division. "Council seats should be based on geography, where anyone can vote if they live in the area, regardless of their identity. That's how it works for every other ward, including rural wards, despite the attempts from some media and councils to frame it differently. That's why ACT has restored communities' right to remove these divisive Māori Ward seats. 'ACT Local candidates will cut waste to keep rates low, end divisive race-based privileges, and bring some long-overdue common sense back to the council table.'
