
Why a new slave labour commissioner won't change anything
Perhaps we could introduce a tariff on products imported from those economies who don't abide by our anti-slavery policies? Of course, no one would take notice of that either. The reason the US can introduce tariffs is because the world cares about what they think. They're the world's biggest customer and they have the biggest defence force. But us? Get real.
In a radio interview on Newstalk ZB this week, Belich suggested that if appointed, the new commissioner will not focus his or her efforts on small business. Only those with revenues of over $50 million per annum will be targeted.
Excuse me? Firstly, my hazy recollection of New Zealand's issues with slavery and labour exploitation suggests that the problems have been detected in small businesses. One case that I recall involved workers doing domestic and orcharding work. Another higher-profile case involved an Auckland restaurant and migrant workers from India. Yet another saw an investigation into a bowling alley. Let's be clear, these are small businesses with revenues substantially less than $50 million.
Secondly, there are plenty of privately owned businesses with perfectly good recruitment and employment records, with no historical examples or even suspicions of anything resembling slavery or labour exploitation, and with turnovers of $50 million or more. And here is a suggestion that, not content with the time wasted in those businesses responding to anti-money laundering requirements, health and safety stupidity, environmental nonsense and climate reporting, we are now going to ask them to bow to the needs of a slavery commissioner!
During the radio interview, Belich admitted that she had no idea of how big a problem slavery is in New Zealand. Elsewhere, I noticed that an accompanying statement said the proposed policy was a response to a World Vision initiative urging us to do something.
And so the truth comes out. The proposal to appoint an anti-slavery commissioner is yet another sop to an overseas organisation that wants to tell us how to live our lives.
Labour's anti-slavery bill misses the mark. writes Bruce Cotterill. Photo / 123rf
Deep down, New Zealanders are good people. We don't like the thought of labour exploitation any more than other decent human beings. But we can stand on our principles all day long. It doesn't mean those in lofty positions of power elsewhere will take any notice.
But let's not underestimate the cost of taking our arguments to the world.
The last time we appointed a commissioner, it was to oversee the cost of groceries. From the moment he was appointed, this writer has been highly sceptical of any benefit at all being delivered to the average New Zealand household as a result. But there he is, sitting in an office within MBIE with a 30-strong staff costing us millions.
And this one would be no different.
Then there is the fact that we have a very good police force. Is it not their job to sniff out criminal behaviour, including anything to do with labour exploitation or slavery? New Zealand currently criminalises slavery and trafficking under existing legislation. That legislation should be enough for the police to act where necessary. If it's not, let's upgrade the legislation instead of creating another government office.
There is something sadly lacking in New Zealand political circles at present. It's called common sense. We seem to be damn keen to jump on board any bandwagon, cause, or worse, gravy train, that pops up without any logical thought about our priorities, potential outcomes, or financial cost.
I'd like to suggest that our politicians would be better to focus on the things that can make a difference to our troubled little economy.
New Zealand has a whole lot of challenges that I'd like to see our elected representatives focusing on. At the top of that list is this. Stop wasting money.
At all levels of government, including local government, we continue to press the case to spend more money. The recent rates increases tell us that Auckland's mayor is one of the few who focuses heavily on costs. And yet it should be the job of every politician to work out what our priorities are, and then tell us how they can do more with less.
But no, projects run over time and budgets are blown. Annual forecasts allow for increasingly eyewatering sums of money for what should be relatively simple and straightforward services.
When you're broke, you have to focus on the things that really matter. That's where the attention goes. And that's where the funding goes. In government terms, we're not really broke, but we're not exactly flush either. The Greens will tell us that we can borrow more money and still have less debt than other nations. But they're overlooking the fact that our low productivity environment makes borrowing a lot easier than paying it back. And our interest bill is already our fourth biggest cost. We'd be foolish to allow it to go any higher unless that debt supported increased income, greater productivity or both.
It's no secret that our problems are plenty. The usual suspects, Health and Education, seem well-funded but poorly resourced. What does that mean? It means there's plenty of money allocated, but not enough of it lands at the coalface.
Elsewhere, our infrastructure deficit is massive and we need different thinking to work out what to do about the inadequacies of our power, water and transport infrastructure in particular.
Then there are our people who can't look after themselves and those who can't cope in today's society. Not looking after those people properly leads to downstream effects, including increasing burdens from health and crime.
Right now, New Zealand is not doing well enough on any of these measures.
If we want to aspire to become a country that's respected and listened to internationally, we would do well to remember the following. The country that can do most to help those less advantaged, including victims of war, famine and yes, even slavery, are those countries with strong economies. Before we start telling the rest of the world how to behave, we need to build an economy that can afford to offer help, rather than just cheaply throwing words around telling others how to live their lives.
As it turns out, we do have room for a new commissioner. I'd like to think we could appoint a commissioner who would make a real and substantive difference to New Zealand. Firstly a difference to the outcomes for our people but also a difference to our international standing. Fixing this one would give us greater license to tell others how to behave. Currently, that license is weakened because of our own inadequacy.
You could call that person the Commissioner for our Greatest Embarrassment. But in reality, they would be a Commissioner for Child Safety. In other words, something or someone that provides a massive focus on preventing us from killing our kids.
Can you believe that we have a Ministry for Children, a Social Wellbeing Agency, and ministerial portfolios for Child Poverty, and for the Prevention of Family Violence? I wonder what all that costs. And yet here we are, ranking 35th in the OECD for the wellbeing of our children.
In case we've forgotten, on average, one child dies every five weeks in New Zealand at the hands of someone responsible for their care. Of the 127 children murdered between 2007 and 2020, three-quarters were under the age of 5.
Let that sink in for a moment. Then tell me that the slave trade in China, Nigeria or India is more important.
I'd like to think we have bigger priorities than the opposition's latest bill.
Our parents used to say, worry about your own backyard first. That sounds like great advice.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scoop
27 minutes ago
- Scoop
Government Faith Initiative Misaligned, Say Groups Who Declined To Join
Joint statement by Islamic Council of New Zealand (ICONZ) and Alternative Jewish Voices (AJV): On Tuesday July 22, a government-sponsored 'harmony initiative' will be signed by some Muslim and Jewish groups. The initiative originated with government recognition that the consequences of Israel's actions in Gaza are impacting Jewish and Muslim communities in Aotearoa, as well as the wider community. While agreeing with that statement of purpose, other Muslim and Jewish groups have chosen to decline the invitation. They believe that the council, as formulated, is misaligned with its aims. 'Gaza is not a religious issue, and this has never been a conflict between our faiths,' Dr. Abdul Monem, a co-founder of ICONZ explains. 'In Gaza we see a massive violation of international law with horrifying humanitarian consequences. We place Israel's annihilating campaign against Gaza, the complicity of states and economies at the centre of our understanding—not religion. The first action to address the suffering in Gaza and ameliorate its effects here in Aotearoa must be government action. Our government needs to comply with international courts and act on this humanitarian calamity. That does not require a new council.' The impetus for this initiative clearly linked international events with their local impacts, but the document does not mention Gaza among the council's priorities. Signatories are not required to acknowledge universal human rights, nor the courts which have ruled so decisively and created obligations for the New Zealand government. Social distress is disconnected from its immediate cause. The council is therefore open to parties who do not recognise the role of international humanitarian law in Palestine, nor the full human and political rights of their fellow New Zealanders. Marilyn Garson, co-founder of Alternative Jewish Voices elaborates, 'It has broad implications to overlook our rights and international humanitarian law. As currently formulated, the council includes no direct Palestinian representation. That's not good enough. How can there be credible discussion of Aotearoa's ethnic safety—let alone advocacy for international action— without Palestinians? 'Law, human rights and the dignity of every person's life are not opinions. They are human entitlements and global agreements to which Aotearoa has bound itself. No person in Aotearoa should have to enter a room—especially a council created under government auspices—knowing that their fundamental rights will not be upheld. No one should have to begin by asking for that which is theirs.' The groups outside this new council wholeheartedly wish to live in a harmonious society, but for them it is unclear why a new council of Jews and Muslims should represent the path to harmony. 'Advocacy that comes from faith can be a powerful force. We already work with numerous interfaith community initiatives, some formed at government initiative and waiting to really find their purpose,' says Dr Muhammad Sajjad Naqvi, President of ICONZ. 'Those existing channels include more of the parties needed to address local threats, including Christian nationalism like that of Destiny Church. Perhaps government should resource those rather than starting something new.' The groups who declined to join the council have warm and enduring relationships with FIANZ and Dayenu, who will take seats at this council table. All of the groups share common goals, but not this path. More information about the organisations: ICONZ is a National Umbrella Organization for Kiwi Shia Muslims for their unified voice. It is an organisation that unites all Muslims who are living in New Zealand and follow the school of the Ahlulbayt (PBUT) under ONE umbrella. ICONZ was established by Kiwi Muslims who have been born in New Zealand or born to migrants who chose New Zealand to be their home. For more, see Alternative Jewish Voices is a collective of Aotearoa Jews. It works for Jewish pluralism and anti-racism, and supports the work of Palestinians who seek liberation grounded in law and our equal human rights. For more, see


NZ Herald
27 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Watch: Christopher Luxon mouths off at ‘frickin' Chris Hipkins over lack of policy
But that has not stopped inflation becoming a political problem, with Hipkins and Edmonds rounding on the Government for high prices this week. Luxon said the Government cared about people on low and middle incomes and helped those people through tax relief using fiscal policy to help the Reserve Bank fight inflation. Annual inflation in the past full quarter before the change of government was 5.6%. Luxon said Labour's outrage over high prices was 'crocodile tears'. 'This is the party that didn't support tax relief - moving tax thresholds. That's not deeply ideological, it helps low and middle income New Zealanders.' Luxon listed his Government's cost of living measures. 'They didn't support FamilyBoost, they didn't support Working for Families credits, they don't talk about helping construction workers by getting on board and u-turning on Fast Track [which Labour opposed, although not for supermarkets], they've got a gazillion positions on PPPs [Public-Private Partnerships], they're all over the place. 'They have no idea what to do - they put us in this mess, we are cleaning up the mess,' Luxon said. Labour leader Chris Hipkins hit back. Photo / Mark Mitchell While Labour opposed these changes in Parliament, it took to the election its own early childhood education policy, extending 20 hours free care to children under 2 years old. It also proposed a more generous Working for Families policy. National copied that policy on the campaign trial, but watered it down during coalition negotiations, costing some families $38 a week. Changes made in the 2025 Budget reduced some of this loss. Hipkins hit back at Luxon, noting that figures obtained by Labour and published on Tuesday showed the full $75 FamilyBoost tax credit was only claimed by a tiny number of households. This means few, if any, households are getting the $252 a fortnight National promised some would get from its tax plan. The Government subsequently changed settings of the policy, meaning more people will start getting more money from it. Willis said about 16,000 more families will get the tax credit. Hipkins defends lack of policy Hipkins defended Labour's light policy slate saying 'we're not even close to an election at the moment'. 'Unlike [Luxon], when we go into an election next year, I will make sure the policies that we have add up and we can actually deliver on them. They didn't actually do that and now they are suffering - and New Zealanders are suffering as a result,' Hipkins said. He said one of the reasons Labour was waiting to unveil policy is the Government has one more budget to deliver. That budget will detail how much money Labour would have to spend if it took over in 2026. 'Before we come out with significant policies that are going to cost money for example, we want to see what the shape of the Government's books are,' Hipkins said. 'I want to know we can afford what we promise,' he said. Hipkins would not say whether the party would have any policy before the Tāmaki Makaurau by-election in September. He has promised a tax policy before the end of the year. Willis also attacked Labour's 'crocodile tears' on the cost of living. Finance Minister Nicola Willis attacked Labour for its lack of policy. Photo / Mark Mitchell Willis took to social media on Monday to note Edmonds was unable to list any cost of living policies. 'I thought it was the most telling thing ever when Barbara Edmonds came down here to do a stand-up lashing us for a 2.7% inflation rate... when asked what specific policy she had to address the cost of living she said 'none' - none, none, none. 'Now that is to me, the boy crying wolf,' Willis said. In the stand-up, Edmonds gave no policy suggestions, she did not literally answer 'none'. Willis said Labour was gripped by 'shallow attack politics which doesn't put bread on anyone's table'. She alleged Labour was 'bereft of ideas' and 'internally divided on what the way forward for New Zealanders is. How much policy is normal In December 2022, the Leader of the Opposition was asked about his own lack of policy and gave a very similar answer to the one Hipkins gave on Tuesday. 'Look, we are one year out from an election ... rest assured, we will have policy,' the leader said. The leader of the opposition back then was Luxon himself. As political campaigning shifts to embrace 'small target' strategies, releasing lots of policy before an election campaign has become less and less common. Assuming the current Parliament runs a roughly full term and there is an election at the end of next year, we are about halfway through the term. At this point in the last Parliament, National had released a tax policy - however, it was careful not to promise that this would be the policy it would take to the election. That policy, published just prior to the 2022 Budget - the middle-Budget in Labour's second term - called on the Government to increase tax thresholds to deliver tax cuts to people to compensate for the higher taxes they were paying because of inflation. Later that year, National confirmed that this particular policy was only a suggestion for the 2022 Budget, but the party committed that its final tax policy would deliver at least the same level of tax cuts as the earlier plan. The final tax package was not announced until the end of August 2023 - less than two months before the October election. National had a handful of policy promises by this stage in the last cycle, including lifting the super age and reintroducing boot camps. Labour has also made some promises, including repealing the Three Strikes law, the future Regulatory Standards Act and reinstating the old Pay Equity Scheme in some form. That last commitment will come with a roughly $13 billion price tag, which will need to be paid for with some kind of tax increase, spending cut, or borrowing. National is keen to pin Labour down on just what combination of those three things Labour is planning. The Simon Bridges-led National Party took a different approach. In its middle year, it released several 'discussion documents' to members and the public testing potential policy ideas and giving a sense of where the party was headed. These discussion documents were meant to form the basis of National's 2020 election policy platform, however, that changed when the party imploded. Hipkins said the party was working on policy internally, but he would not say anything more. 'We haven't released discussion documents but that is the work we have been doing,' Hipkins said. 'We've got to make sure all the pieces of our policy fit together,' he said.


Scoop
27 minutes ago
- Scoop
Nicola Willis Urged To Step In Now To Get Kiwi Food Aid To Gaza
PSNA is urging the government to step in and require Paypal to refund money it refuses to pass on starving families in Occupied Gaza. Paypal has been freezing accounts which send money to Occupied Gaza – the latest being the account of Wellington-based writer 'Emily Writes' who has posted about her sickening experiences here. 'Paypal is happy to provide backup to Israel's genocide by ensuring food is only available through the Israeli military which is using it to ethnically cleanse starving Palestinians from the north to the south of the Occupied Gaza strip' says PSNA Co-Chair John Minto. 'Using food aid like this is a war crime and we are asking Minister of Finance Nicola Willis to step in and demand Paypal allow kiwis to donate to starving families in Gaza' 'Low and middle-income New Zealanders kiwis are naturally generous but Paypal is not only freezing these accounts but are refusing to refund the money.' 'The New Zealand government has refused to condemn Israel's mass killing and mass starvation of Palestinians but they can insist money from New Zealanders wanting to help is not frozen for six months while Israel's war on humanity continues' We are waiting to hear back from the minister.