8. JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) Link to this
to the Minister for Social Development and Employment
Does he agree with the statements of his predecessor, the Hon Steve Maharey, that the household labour force survey is “the only credible and consistent measure of unemployment”, the “best way of measuring New Zealand’s performance internationally”, and “the only accepted measure of unemployment”?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister for Social Development and Employment) Link to this
I am somewhat surprised that the member has nothing better to do than to trawl through Steve Maharey’s press releases from 7 years ago, good reading though they are—
Madam SPEAKERPlease be seated. The Minister knows that such comments prefacing an answer to a question are bound to create disorder. So I would ask Ministers to refrain from doing so and to please just address the question.
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
For the member’s information and for the information of the House, I point out that the household labour force survey is New Zealand’s only official measure of the unemployment rate. Let me remind the House of the unemployment rate that the Labour-led Government inherited when coming into office shortly before Mr Maharey made those statements. In 1999 the unemployment rate was 6.8 percent; it is now 3.8 percent. In 1999 the youth unemployment rate was 16.7 percent; it is now 14.1 percent. In 1999 the unemployment rate for Māori was 16.6 percent; it is now 7.9 percent. In 1999 the unemployment rate of Pacific peoples was 13.6 percent; it is now 6.5 percent. I think members would agree that this is rather a credible and consistent improvement.
If the household labour force survey is the official register of unemployment, was the reason the Minister said in the House last week that the survey had shortcomings because the data confirms that unemployment amongst 15 to 19-year-olds has actually increased by 16 percent from 24,000 in March last year to 27,800 in March this year, according to the most recent household labour force survey?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
It is important that the member does not confuse the unemployment benefit figures and the household labour force survey. The household labour force survey, I note for members’ information, includes all people who are seeking 1 hour or more employment per week, including full-time students and retired people. Many people, of course, such as full-time students or those receiving New Zealand superannuation, are quite reasonably not entitled to any unemployment support. The numbers can therefore be, and are in fact, quite different, especially for youth, because the household labour force survey unemployment figure will include, for example, any school or tertiary student seeking part-time work.
Lynne PillayCould the Minister remind the House how many young people were on an unemployment benefit in 1999 compared with now?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
I can report that in December 1999 there were 17,514 18 and 19-year-olds receiving an unemployment benefit. In March of this year there were 1,566 young people receiving such a benefit. I can now report that in the most recent figures at the end of May, that number was only 1,227. That is a massive 93 percent reduction in unemployed 18 and 19-year-olds since this Government took office. That success is equally mirrored with impressive results for Māori and Pacific young people. The number of 18 and 19-year-old Māori unemployed at the end of May was 477, which is a 92 percent reduction since National was in office. Pacific unemployment numbers for the same period are now 125. That is a 91 percent reduction since National was in office, and let me stress that that number of 1,227, only 407 have been receiving an unemployment benefit for more than 13 weeks.
When will the Minister confirm that New Zealand still has a major problem with teenage unemployment, that 15 to 19-year-olds have been shunted off the unemployment benefit to other benefits or to dubious employment schemes, and that the 2002 goal of getting all 15 to 19-year-olds into employment, education, or industry training has been abandoned by the 27,800 people who are now unemployed teenagers—which that Minister will not admit?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
I think that most New Zealanders would welcome the very strong Government focus, which is on reducing benefit dependency, and, in particular, on ensuring that young people who are at risk of under-employment, unemployment, or long-term unemployment, or who have low skills, are appropriately supported. The success of those initiatives is only too well demonstrated with the dramatic fall in benefit numbers that I have detailed several times in the last few days.
Why does the Minister use household labour force data sometimes—when it suits his version—as he did on 10 May this year, but when it comes to using it as a measure of teenage unemployment he discounts it and insists on using the same Work and Income figures, which he has quoted today, that Steve Maharey said were no more than an administrative tool?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
I talk about the household labour force survey when I am talking about the household labour force survey. When I talk about unemployment benefit numbers I refer to unemployment benefit numbers.
Why does the Minister choose to use figures that his predecessor, Steve Maharey, called just “an administrative tool” when Mr Maharey has also stated that using Work and Income figures rather than the household labour force data was “to play fast and loose with unemployment statistics”?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
I use the household labour force survey because it enables us to track participation rates, and employment and unemployment rates, and to compare them with the OECD statistics, which are measured in a similar fashion. The household labour force survey conforms with the standard International Labour Organization guidelines for comparability. It helps us recognise our successes in international terms. The household labour force survey has enabled us to see, for example, that we have the fifth-lowest unemployment rate among the 27 OECD countries with comparable data—that shows a pretty considerable improvement. In December 1999 we were 14th; now we are fifth out of 27 OECD countries.
Can the Minister explain why 3 years after his predecessor announced a $56.9 million package in Budget 2004 to provide all 15 to 19-year-olds with a “kick-start to their working lives” the number of unemployed 15 to 19-year-olds has actually increased by 16 percent according to the official register of the household labour force survey?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
I have already explained to that member that the household labour force survey includes all people who may be looking for 1 hour’s work or more and includes students. It is a good example of why it is often more important to look at the actual unemployment figures. I think the best answer for the member’s question is if I read the trending—
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
The best answer I can provide for the member is to read the trending in one cohort. I will choose 18 and 19-year-old unemployment numbers from 1998 to the present day. In 1998 there were 14,000 receiving that support; in 1999 there were 17,000; in 2000 there were 13,500; in 2001 there were 11,000; in 2002, 10,000; in 2003, 9,163; in 2004, 5,991; in 2005, 4,271; in 2006, 3,262; and the last figure, in 2007—and remember that the starting point, the highest point, was 17,500—in May was 1,227.
I seek leave to table the article “ ‘Honest’ job figures sought”, from the Dominion Post in October 2002
I seek leave to table the article “Mayors give up target date to end teen joblessness” of 23 April 2007.
I seek leave to table the article “Complacency kills students’ dreams” of 11 May 2007 in the New Zealand Herald.