Death by A Thousand Cuts

However you look at it, the damage to Christchurch is a tragic disaster that will continue to affect all of us for a long time and in many ways. Inevitably, economics raises its ugly head - the cost of rebuilding, the slowing of the economy due to so many businesses unable to trade, and the ways we are all going to have to pay.

Before the latest big quake hit, the Prime Minister had raised the issue of asset sales. Now, asset sales are one avenue the Government will consider to pay for rebuilding Christchurch, along with raising the earthquake levy and trimming social programmes such as Working for Families. Rejected was the suggestion that last year's tax cuts should be reversed, cuts that put the most money into the pockets of those on higher incomes, including our Prime Minister. This move, it was claimed, would tend to 'slow the economy'.

Many of us recall with dismay the asset sales of the previous century, an orgy of fire sales that gutted our railroad system, turned our publicly owned postal and telephone service into a lolly scramble monopoly for the benefit of wealthy overseas shareholders, and threw a spanner of confusion into our once reliable and cost-effective electricity supply for almost a decade. The earlier attempt to privatise ACC attracted both an insurance company feeding frenzy and a public outcry that the Government of the day could not ignore. NCWNZ policy is clear - members have many times rejected private or commercial ownership of our essential services, assets and resources. DSC policy is even clearer: public ownership right on up to the money supply.

No doubt the current Government intends make smaller moves towards flogging off our assets, to give us all time to get used to increasing economic colonisation. We hear grim warnings of Government debt, and happy references to ‘Mum and Dad' investors owning shares, but the truths are these:

· 'Publicly owned assets' means we the people already own them, and shouldn't need to buy shares.

· People with spare money to invest are dwindling in number anyway.

· Selling even part of an income-earning utility company mean less income for the Government.

· Government debt may be slightly reduced by selling assets, but private and corporate debt, already unsustainably high, will increase.

· Wherever the debt lies, we all pay for it through the prices of goods and services, which keep going up.

· Those few who have invested will soon be pressured to sell out to large overseas corporations, for lack of local buyers (think Crayfer Farms).

· Before long, all assets, resources and essential services will be foreign owned, and corporate colonisation will be complete. We will be tenants in our own country.

Meanwhile, the paring of early childhood funding, the squeezing of solo parents and beneficiaries and the demonising of the baby boomers to save on future super payments may impact severely on the general public, and yet not claw in nearly enough to rebuild Christchurch. Which begs the question: won’t squeezing the living standards of middle and lower income households also ‘slow the economy’?

Money was invented to facilitate trade. Anything that needs doing for the public good, where there are people and materials sufficient for the work, should not be held back for lack of money. If we can find the physical resources and manpower needed to rebuild Christchurch and care for its people, money should be available to make it happen.

As yet, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand is still in public hands. As it shored up the commercial banks during the 2008 credit crunch, the RBNZ has the capability to issue credit lines and even debt-free funding for the emergency in Christchurch. In fact, the RBNZ creates and issues money already, in the form of notes and coins. An electronic version of this money creation could be issued, not to on-sell to commercial banks, but to the Treasury in aid of Christchurch.

This sort of cash injection has a number of beneficial effects.

· There is no increase in debt levels.

· Jobs will be created and more people employed.

· More employment will have better health outcomes for families.

· The Government will take more in revenue, and pay less in welfare costs.

· More spending power will benefit small and medium businesses, which in turn will employ more staff.

It is a shame that the tragedy of Christchurch, instead of inspiring visionary leadership and creative solutions, is being used as an excuse to levy more tax, bring in draconian austerity measures and sell off our lucrative utility businesses to multinational corporations.

Put us out of our misery, please. Instead of a thousand cuts to our body corporate, so that as a nation we slowly bleed to death, why not just sell Christchurch wholesale, and cut out our heart?