Despite decades of cost cutting, governments spend more than ever. How can we make sense of this?

By Ian Lovering* of
International relations academic Ian Lovering delves into some of the history and social structures at play behind decisions about the national budget.
Photo:
RNZ
Analysis
: Recent controversies over New Zealand's Ka Ora, Ka Ako school lunch programme have revolved around the apparent shortcomings of the food and its delivery. Stories
of inedible meals
,
scalding packaging
and general waste have dominated headlines.
But the story is also a window into the wider debate about the politics of "fiscal responsibility" and
austerity politics
.
As part of the mission to "cut waste" in government spending, ACT leader and Associate Education Minister David Seymour
replaced the school-based scheme
with a centralised programme run by a catering corporation. The result was said to have delivered "saving for taxpayers"
of $130 million
- in line with the government's overall drive for efficiency and cost cutting.
While Finance Minister Nicola Willis dislikes the term "austerity", her May budget
cut the government's operating allowance in half
, to $1.3 billion. This came on top of
Budget cuts last year
of around $4 billion.
Similar policy doctrines have been subscribed to by governments of all political persuasions for decades. As economic growth (and the tax revenue it brings) has been harder for OECD countries to achieve over the past 50 years, governments have looked to make savings.
What is strange, though, is that despite decades of austerity policies reducing welfare and outsourcing public services to the most competitive corporate bidder, state spending has kept increasing.
New Zealand's public expense as a percentage of GDP increased from 25.9 percent in 1972 to 35.9 percent in 2022. And this wasn't unusual. The OECD as a whole saw an increase from 18.9 percent in 1972 to 29.9 percent in 2022.
How can we make sense of so-called austerity when, despite decades of cost cutting, governments spend more than ever?
In
a recent paper
, I argued that the politics of austerity is not only about how much governments spend. It is also about who gets to decide how public money is used.
Austerity sounds like it is about spending less, finding efficiencies or living within your means. But ever rising budgets mean it is about more than that.
In particular, austerity is shaped by a centralising system that locks in corporate and bureaucratic control over public expenditure, while locking out people and communities affected by spending decisions. In other words, austerity is about democracy as much as economics.
We typically turn to the ideology of neoliberalism - democracy as much as economics.
We typically turn to the ideology of neoliberalism - "Rogernomics" being the New Zealand variant - to explain the history of this. The familiar story is of a revolutionary clique taking over a bloated postwar state, reorienting it towards the global market, and making it run more like a business.
Depending on your political persuasion, the contradiction of austerity's growing cost reflects either the short-sightedness of market utopianism or the stubbornness of the public sector to reform.
But while the 1980s neoliberal revolution was important, the roots of austerity's managerial dimension go back further. And it was shaped less by a concern that spending was too high, and more by a desire to centralise control over a growing budget.
Godfather of 'rational' budgeting: US Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara (right), with US president Lyndon B Johnson (centre), in a Cabinet meeting, in 1968.
Photo:
Yoichi Okamoto - Public Domain
Many of the managerial techniques that have arrived in the public sector over the austerity years - such as results-based pay, corporate contracting, performance management or evaluation culture - have their origins in
a budgetary revolution
that took place in the 1960s at the US Department of Defence.
In the early 1960s, Defence Secretary Robert McNamara was frustrated with being nominally in charge of budgeting but having to mediate between the seemingly arbitrary demands of military leaders for more tanks, submarines or missiles.
In response, he called on the RAND Corporation, a US think tank and consultancy, to remake the Defence Department's budgetary process to give the secretary greater capacity to plan.
The outcome was called the
Planning Programming Budgeting System
. Its goal was to create a "rational" budget where policy objectives were clearly specified in quantified terms, the possible means to achieve them were fully costed, and performance indicators measuring progress were able to be reviewed.
This approach might have made sense for strategic military purposes. But what happens when you apply the same logic to planning public spending in healthcare, education, housing - or school lunches? The past 50 years have largely been a process of finding out.
What began as a set of techniques to help McNamara get control of military spending gradually diffused into
social policy
. These ideas travelled from the US and came to be known as the "
New Public Management
" framework that transformed state sectors all over the world.
Dramatic moments of spending cuts - such as the 1991 "
Mother of all Budgets
" in New Zealand or Elon Musk's recent
DOGE crusade
in the US - stand out as major exercises in austerity. And fiscal responsibility is a firmly held conviction within mainstream political thinking.
Nevertheless, government spending has become a major component of OECD economies. If we are to make sense of austerity in this world of permanent mass expenditure, we need a broader idea of what public spending is about.
Budgets are classically thought to do three things. For economists, they are a tool of macroeconomic stabilisation: if growth goes down, "automatic stabilisers" inject public money into the economy to pick it back up.
For social reformers, the budget is a means of progressively redistributing resources through tax and welfare systems. For accountants, the budget is a means of cost accountability: it holds a record of public spending and signals a society's future commitments.
But budgeting as described here also fulfils a fourth function - managerial planning. Decades of reform have made a significant portion of the state budget a managerial instrument for the pursuit of policy objectives.
From this perspective, underlying common austerity rhetoric about eliminating waste, or achieving value for money, is a deeper political struggle over who decides how that public money is used.
To return to New Zealand's school lunch programme, any savings achieved should not distract from the more significant democratic question of who should plan school lunches - and public spending more broadly.
Should it be the chief executives of corporatised public organisations and outsourced conglomerates managing to KPIs on nutritional values and price per meal, serving the directives of government ministers? Or should it be those cooking, serving and eating the lunches?
* Ian Lovering is a lecturer in international relations, at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington.
This story was originally published on
The Conversation
.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

RNZ News

6 hours ago

• RNZ News

Hawke's Bay residents outraged over council's proposed water rate hike

The hike is due to a proposed regional water entity to replace the Three Waters Policy. Photo: RNZ/Alexa Cook A group of Central Hawke's Bay residents are accusing the council of causing 'geriatric poverty' because of a proposed water rates hike of $5000 dollars per household over the next decade. In the quiet township of Takapau, a group of angry residents have banded together to fight the council's proposed water rates increases. (Left to right) Takapau residents Carl Tippett, Owen Clough, Lincoln Taylor, Christine Ross, Carmel Thompson, Kim Mathewson and Diane Sweeney. Photo: RNZ/Alexa Cook Kim Mathewson told RNZ she's outraged about the entire council process, and fears the devastating impact it'll have on their community. "There will be geriatric poverty here. That's really sad when someone thinks 'can't turn on the heater because of the power bill, I can't buy food because I have to buy the rates'. What kind of country are we living in? "Does this council have any social conscience? Because the way it is right now it appears they don't," she said. Kim has crunched the numbers on her own rates bill and said if, or when, water rates reach the council's forecast of $7000 a household by 2035, it will simply be unaffordable because it takes the total annual rates bill to about $9,500. "That's $180 a week per household of rates alone, plus $100 insurance, plus your power bill... if you're on a pension you're pretty much going to be left with $50 a week if you're lucky. No one can afford that," she said. Lincon Taylor owns Takapau business Taylor Made Gates and said under the CHBDC proposal he's facing a water rates rise of more than $25,000 a year for his business and the four properties he rents to his workers. "It's a huge increase. I find it hard to understand how the figures add up, what the council is trying to achieve, and who is paying for it," Taylor said. He said the regional model was probably needed, as Hastings and Napier could help make it an economy of scale for borrowing money, but worried about smaller rural communities like his. "I hope it doesn't turn around and bite small communities too hard because they can't afford it. "I'm proud of the fact that Takapau township has become a retirement village effectively... but they are the ones who are going to be affected the most. To add $4000 to their rates is going to be horrendous," Taylor said. Under the CHBDC proposal, Taylor Made Gates owner Lincoln Taylor estimates his water rates bill will increase by about $25,000 a year for his business and the rental properties for his workers. Photo: RNZ/Alexa Cook Carmel Thompson manages the CHB budget service and helps over 300 families and pensioners with their spending. But with the inevitable water rates increase, she's concerned about how her clients - both homeowners and renters - will make ends meet. "We have a lot of elderly women on our books and those living off only the pension are already struggling with the rates so I hate to think what will happen if we end up with these huge water rates, I'm not sure how these people will manage. "The elderly on pensions are our new poor. Everyone in the community is suffering though, it's really really sad," Thompson said. Fellow Takapau resident, Carl Tippett agreed. He moved from a rural property into the village of Takapau, but was now looking at moving away. "This is the beginning of the death of small towns right throughout New Zealand. If this goes ahead then people like us, over 65's, will not be able to afford to live... I feel angry. "We're at the end of the rope not the beginning. Frankly it's too late... there should have been a much longer consultation," he said. Owen Clough felt the council and government had failed to properly consider the huge impact on its residents if water rates skyrocket over $7000 by 2035. "There's no social thought about what is going to happen. No one has sat down and said 'can they afford afford this, can the country afford this?', because the answer is no," he said. Takapau pensioner Diana Sweeney was frustrated by the same issues, and questioned whether CHBDC was doing enough to lobby the government for help. "The lack of responsibility to this community by previous councils, the buck has to stop somewhere. The council needs to be our voice, we are a small town and we count. They need to spend our money responsibly," she said. A feeling echoed by Christine Ross, she's also part of the group and is one of 208 people who made submissions on the 'Local Water Done Well' proposals. "I can't afford to pay an increased rate on a single pension, it'll be almost 50 percent of my pension each week being spend on rates and I don't have it. "I won't be able to afford to live here, or anywhere at this rate. I'm horrified, I don't understand why the council isn't working for us, to help us," she said. CHB Mayor Alex Walker told RNZ the 'Local Water Done Well' was government's policy and framework. "The costs outlined in the current model are confronting, however council is actively working on options to reduce this cost, as outlined in the report to Council on 5 June. "We take every person, in every community seriously. Takapau was the first community in the district to get major water treatment plant upgrades in 2019," she said. CHBDC Mayor Alex Walker. Photo: RNZ / Alexa Cook CHBDC said it had the "perfect storm" of water problems in the region, with years of underinvestment, increasing regulations and an intimidating list of three waters infrastructure that needed upgrading or replacing. 85 percent of total council debt is related to the three waters programme with 25 percent of the drinking water piping network and 40 percent of the wastewater piping network at high risk of failure. Two water reservoirs are over 100 years old and need replacing, seven water treatment plants need $47 million of upgrades, and six wastewater treatment plants are not compliant and urgently need upgrading to the tune of $112 million. Central Hawke's Bay residents feel their council hasn't been transparent about the forecast future water rates hike. Photo: RNZ/Alexa Cook The Mayor said the council had consulted with the community for five weeks and had 10 meetings including two in Takapau. "Affordability. Affordability. Affordability. It is our key challenge and Local Water Done Well does not convincingly deliver that for us yet. Our community can see it and they are, quite rightly, not happy," Walker said. She said the council was continuously talking to government about the district's challenges and opportunities. "We have made multiple approaches to government, including seeking financial support and leading early work across the region on the Hawke's Bay Model in 2019. "Local Water Done Well is the government's approach to address the challenges districts, like ours, face which sets out that ratepayers not government pays for water assets like any other utility, such as electricity or gas," she said. Residents don't just have an issue with the cost, but also with what they said was a lack of consultation with residents over the massive water rates hike being proposed. Kim Mathewson told RNZ the council had known about the proposal since December, but only informed residents in May. "They're not being transparent right now and presenting all the figures. The information they gave us at the community meeting was like a power point presentation for a business, it didn't give you the facts. "It didn't highlight the $7000 increase and it was so small at the bottom of the page... to me that's not being transparent... it's being dishonest," she said. But mayor Alex Walker said the council had been transparent, and the financial rules presented in December have rapidly changed and are no longer correct. "That we were approaching consultation has been flagged in the media, and the regional work towards LWDW has been reported on repeatedly over the last few years. "We have had constructive conversations with people across the district. Most people are aware we are fighting for them, not with them, to make the district a better place and figure out an affordable solution," Walker said. However, residents want to see CHBDC lobby the government for more funding, to try and reduce the burden on ratepayers. "They have to fight the fight with the government. I've said to them: 'when you first saw this why did you not come to us, we are your biggest ally and you chose not to use us'. "We could have been fighting this fight two years ago. The consultation period has been too short, but I do know it's been the same for every community," Kim Mathewson said. Under the new 'Local Water Done Well' scheme, the Central Hawke's Bay District Council consulted with its community on three options: A regional controlled organisation (its preferred option), a stand-alone district council controlled organisation or an in-house delivery unit. However, under the scheme there are also two other options that weren't presented to CHB resident; a mixed council and consumer trust owned model, and a consumer trust owned organisation where assets are transferred from council to a trust. "They should have showed us all the options and presented them much better," Kim Mathewson said. However, CHBDC said it was only able to legislatively comply with three options, which was what it presented to the community in the Consultation Document, and this was explained on its website. Having now heard the public submissions on the proposed options for water services, the council will deliberate these at its meeting on July 3rd. All councils have to submit a 'water service delivery plan' to the government by September 3rd 2025. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

RNZ News

7 hours ago

• RNZ News

Scrapping national census raises data sovereignty, surveillance fears for Māori

By Lara Greaves, Ella Pēpi Tarapa-Dewes, Kiri West, Larissa Renfrew of An administrative census will use information collected in day-to-day government activities. Photo: 2023 Census, Stats NZ Analysis - Wednesday's announcement that the five-yearly national census would be scrapped has raised difficult questions about the effectiveness, ethics and resourcing of the new 'administrative' system that will replace it. An administrative census will use information collected in day-to-day government activities, such as emergency-room admission forms, overseas travel declarations and marriage licences. The move is not necessarily bad in principle, especially given the rising cost of the census and declining participation rates, but to make it effective and robust, it must be properly resourced - and it must give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi), as set out in the Data and Statistics Act. The transformation process so far leaves considerable room for doubt that these things will happen. In particular, there are major ethical and Māori data sovereignty issues at stake. As Te Mana Raraunga (the Māori Data Sovereignty Network) advocates, data is a living taonga (treasure), is of strategic value to Māori and should be subject to Māori governance. Changes to census methods risk compromising these values and undermining public trust in the official statistics system in general. Because the new system takes census data gathering out of the hands of individual citizens and households, it also raises questions about state surveillance and social licence. Surveillance means more than police stakeouts or phone-tapping. The state constantly collects and uses many kinds of data about us and our movements. For more than a decade, the Integrated Data Infrastructure has been the government's tool to patch gaps in its own data ecosystems. This administrative data is collected without our direct and informed consent, and there is no real way to opt out. The safeguard is that information about individuals is 'de-identified', once it enters the Integrated Data Infrastructure - no names, just data points. Stats NZ, which administers the system, says it has the social licence to collect, cross-reference and use this administrative data, but genuine social licence requires that people understand and accept how their data is being used. Stats NZ's own research shows only about one in four people surveyed have enough knowledge about its activities to make an informed judgement. The risks associated with this form of surveillance are amplified for Māori, because of their particular historical experience with data and surveillance. The Crown used data collection and monitoring systems to dispossess land and suppress cultural practices, which continue to disproportionately affect Māori communities today. Meaningful work to address this has taken place under the Mana Ōrite agreement , a partnership between Stats NZ and the Data Iwi Leaders Group (part of the National Iwi Chairs Forum). The agreement aims to solidify iwi authority over their own data, and ensure Māori perspectives are heard in decision-making around data and statistics. On the face of it, repurposing administrative data seems like a realistic solution to the census budget blowout, but there are questions about whether the data and methods used in an administrative census will be robust and of high quality. This has implications for policy and for communities. Administrative data in its current form is limited in many ways. In particular, it misses what is actually important to Māori communities and what makes life meaningful to them. Administrative data often only measures problems. It is collected on Māori at their most vulnerable - when they're in crisis, sick or struggling - which creates a distorted picture. In contrast, Te Kupenga (a survey by Stats NZ last run in 2018) included information by Māori and from a Māori cultural perspective that reflected lived realities. Before increasing reliance on administrative data, greater engagement with Māori will be needed to ensure a data system that gathers and provides reliable, quality data. It is especially important for smaller hapori Māori (Māori communities), which need the data to make decisions for their members. Stats NZ plans to partly fill the data void left by removing the traditional census with regular surveys, but the small sample size of surveys often makes it impossible to obtain reliable information on smaller groups, such as takatāpui (Māori of diverse gender and sexualities), or specific hapū or iwi groups. Photo: RNZ /Dom Thomas It is not clear the implications of this have been fully been worked through in the census change process, nor is it clear whether the recommendations from Stats NZ's Future Census Independent External Review Panel - from Māori and a range of experts - have been fully considered. This included crucial recommendations around commissioning an independent analysis informed by te Tiriti principles, meaningful engagement with iwi-Māori and the continuing implementation of a Māori data governance model developed by Māori data experts. We are not opposed to updating the way in which census data is collected, but for the new approach to be just, ethical and legal will require it to adhere to te Tiriti o Waitangi and the relationship established in the Mana Ōrite agreement . Lara Greaves is an Associate Professor of Politics, Te Herenga Waka - Victoria University of Wellington Ella Pēpi Tarapa-Dewes is Professional Teaching Fellow, Faculty of Arts and Education, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau Kiri West is a lecturer in Indigenous Communication, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau Larissa Renfrew, is a PhD Candidate, School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau. - This story originally appeared on [ the Conversation].

RNZ News

8 hours ago

• RNZ News

Defence heads face scrutiny week hearing, promise to be fiscally responsible

Defence secretary Brook Barrington. Photo: Ministry of Defence Defence heads have assured politicians their huge new budget takes into account soldiers actually having to fire their weapons. They fronted up to an even-tempered scrutiny week hearing with MPs at Parliament on Thursday afternoon. Greens MP Lawrence Xu-Nan asked whether the budget boost of $9 billion new spending over four years allowed for buying the likes of replacement Javelin missiles, which cost $400,000 each. Defence secretary Brook Barrington responded that the increased budget meant troops could now move past the approach from the last 50 years of being only partly equipped. "The defence force is actually being provided with funding to ensure that, if we upgrade the capabilty, we are also able to shoot things with it," he said. Along with defence force Chief Air Marshal Tony Davies, Barrington laid out a raft of measures they said would enable them to buy weapons and other systems faster and smarter. "The demand queue is growing," Barrington said. "The longer it takes us to lodge an order, someone else has got their place in the queue before us and some of this stuff takes three years. "You know, you lose your place in the queue... and you're losing time." They felt a sense of urgency, but also had to ensure quality thresholds were set, so that in 3-4 years he was not up before MPs again being told, "We knew we couldn't trust you folk to bloody get your way out of a paper bag", he said. "We've got to find a sweet spot between rigour, confidence and pace." He added defence had already met with 280 people from 174 companies, both last month and this month, and that an industry strategy would be put out soon. They would be fiscally responsible with the billions of taxpayer money, Davies said. Defence Force Chief Air Marshal Tony Davies. Photo: RNZ / Ashleigh McCaull To accelerate, they would drop the old approach of trying to get 30 years of life from gear and retreading it, and instead, look at getting a "minimum viable product" quickly out to the field, he said. "Simple... quick... lean." On the personnel front, they had to rebuild forces, he said. The budget and plan had "buoyed" personnel, but their thinned-back ranks still constrained how much notice they needed to deploy, how long they could deploy for and whether they could mount multiple operations. Personnel turnover had fallen to less than seven percent, but vacancy rates in February were about 30 percent, an Official Information Act request (OIA) showed. The army was short 1500 people, Air Force 660 and navy 630. Defence was "over-training" people to hit 100 percent, when it did not need to, so was reviewing how to speed training up, Davies said. The 15-year plan was to add 20 percent to combat forces - or 2500 people - and the only way to do that currently was to cut civilian jobs down, he said. "At the moment, we've got ships tied up that can't go to sea, because we haven't got the sailors. We've got people that are going on their fifth deployment overseas, because we don't have the number of soldiers. "We've got Joint Force headquarters out at Trentham with watchfloors that can't be filled, because we haven't got the uniformed people with those skills. "We need those. The money is tight, still, even with uplifts." An OIA response showed that, in March, a hefty 313 positions were vacant at Joint Defence Services, far more than in other sections. Defence Minister Judith Collins said the point was to be able to defend against anybody who "threatened our people, or our assets". "Our people are not going to have to wave a white flag anymore. They are going to be able to get out there and protect themselves." She said she had told "prime" multinational defence contractors their best bet for getting a share of the business was to involve New Zealand firms. The small firms would not be written "out of the equation", Barrington said. He added the business cases for two very large projects - replacing the 757s and the maritime helicopters - were well advanced. Other business cases would be made short and sharp. The fleet renewal planning was by far the biggest job, but the budget gave the ministry a couple of million dollars extra for teams to do that. "What happens in two years, if the world situation's got worse and we need to step it up again?" Davies said. "How are we going to accelerate our capability acquisition process. It might be that we need to double our efforts there, so we are constantly looking at ways to fine tune it." The budget set aside $155m over four years for new military allowances for deployments and hundreds of millions for more operations. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.