More damn statistics and Women in Canterbury

I know I just wrote a post yesterday critiquing the Government’s choice of statistics, and no-one wants to read continual disputes over statistics but the following statements from Paula Bennett’s media release today are just too provoking:

“I also recall dire predictions that Cantabrians would go onto benefits in huge numbers post-quake, but in fact at most there were 6,324 on the Unemployment Benefit in June 2011,” says Mrs Bennett.

“That’s because firstly the Government spent $214 million on work subsidies to keep employers and workers in business and then continued a focus on helping business growth and getting people off welfare into work.”  Paula Bennett 28 Feb 2013

I wonder how the women in Canterbury feel about these statements when they consider the the Human Rights Commission report showing women accounted for 70% of the decrease in employment in Canterbury with the number of women in employment decreasing by 19,200, in the year to September 2011 and of the 4500 jobs that were created in 2011 women only got 8.9% of these.

The consequences of such a gendered impact may well be far reaching and limiting the Government’s response to a PR exercise to try and encourage young women into non-traditional jobs is absolutely inadequate.

8 thoughts on “More damn statistics and Women in Canterbury

  1. Jan – you complain about facts out of context and cherry picking, by taking facts out of context and cherry picking.

    You omit to give the Human Rights Commissions reasons why so many women lost jobs – that the biggest job losses were in shops, cafes, and hotels – where women were far more prominently employed.

    And the vast majority of new jobs were in construction – jobs women seldom apply for.

  2. I wonder how much of this is about choice (inasmuch as bad things happen and people make changes). In a family under stress, a part-time second income earner might prioritise other needs. Just a thought (can’t access the report via link).

    Another reason the benefit numbers in Canterbury didn’t rise is because people moved to Nelson/Marlborough/West Coast and down to Dunedin/Southland. There were unusual rises in those regions.

  3. @photonz1

    “And the vast majority of new jobs were in construction – jobs women seldom apply for.”

    Isn’t that the whole point? Jobs traditionally employing males get subsidized, while more gender equal roles are not?

  4. Kz says ” Isn’t that the whole point? Jobs traditionally employing males get subsidized, while more gender equal roles are not?”

    How do you think all the female dominated jobs in cafes, shops and hotels will come back if those cafes, shops and hotels don’t exist?

    First, they have to be constructed.

  5. I would be genuinely interested if someone could tell me if ANY sort of survey has ever been conducted to determine if or how many young women are actually wanting “non traditional” employment? Whether certain individuals or political parties like it or not, the physiological and psychological differences of males and females are very real and for many, “non traditional” roles may genuinely not appeal even if given the information and option.
    All hail to women mechanics and male nurses but we don’t all want to go there. What needs to be more esteemed is the “traditional” work that females do.

  6. I wonder how the women in Canterbury feel about these statements when they consider the the Human Rights Commission report showing women accounted for 70% of the decrease in employment in Canterbury with the number of women in employment decreasing by 19,200, in the year to September 2011 and of the 4500 jobs that were created in 2011 women only got 8.9% of these.

    It’s so sinister!! it’s almost like a huge natural disaster happened skewing the statistics!!

    The consequences of such a gendered impact may well be far reaching

    Yet all social indicators seem to show a strengthening of family (both immediate and extended) as people rise to the challenge of rebuilding their city.

    I choose to be deeply proud of Cantabrians and how they dealt with their prolonged catastrophe, never before has ‘over the hill’ felt so close to us on the West Coast.

    Perhaps it’s time for the left to finally give up on exploiting the pain of others for their own appalling self promotion.

  7. I choose to be deeply proud of Cantabrians and how they dealt with their prolonged catastrophe…

    Make that “continuing to deal with their prolonged catastrophe”…

    Despite there being a “new normal”, life in Canterbury is still nowhere near “normal”. Even in the bits that are less badly re-normal’d…

Comments are closed.