National’s innovation policy in three charts

If Steven Joyce is such a believer in innovation, why is he planning to cut his investment in innovation so dramatically?

Here, in three charts, is what National’s long-term commitment to innovation looks like:

National spend on innovation
Chart source: Draft National Statement of Science Investment

1. National will cut their investment in science and innovation by 21 percent, in real terms, out to 2023/24.

2. The cuts parallel their lack of a long-term commitment, in real terms, to tertiary education – the pipeline of our future innovators:

National spend on tertiary education
Chart source: Treasury 2014

3. Is it little wonder, therefore, that after six years of a National Government, our export economy continues to simplify?

Manufactured exports
Chart source: Statistics NZ

There is an alternative to National’s plan to bet the farm on the farm, and that is a smart green economy. Read more here:


5 Comments Posted

  1. To Economise is to do what you do better so it costs less So lets get rid of the high end bludgers who keep dumping our produce at firesale prices because they are too tight to pay for innovative labour and create a value added product
    All palava and no pavlova. this govt is here for the money controllers not what this country is good at, we need paid for what we are really worth and not an economy that is paying for a highway from China to here with nothing for us but serfdom

  2. Key & Co are succeeding in transforming our economy – into a third world extractive, exploitative, utterly dependent economy.

    Whether this is actually a good idea or not, it is what some New Zealanders (owners of things that can be sold) seem to want. This is arguably going to be fewer and fewer of us over time, as we sell off more and more, so the current crop of Nationalistas must be the largest (and most inherently stupid and greedy) to come along. Next generation will be smaller, and the next smaller still, until ALL New Zealanders are reduced to wage slavery, debt peonage and farm labor in the land they formerly called their own.

    Who does Key really work for?

  3. Who does John Key really work for!? No way in hell it is us.

    We do not have the robust economy that some people think we have. We have a near monoculture. An almost purely extractive and exploitative economy in which we sell raw materials and farm output to other nations, adding almost no value and manufacturing nothing.

    That’s basically a third world economy. So why is this drive to turn NZ into a third world economic “power” so popular?

    …because it is the path of least resistance. The greatest gain for the owners of stuff that can be sold. Looks good in the short term, until one runs out of assets to sell, rivers to ruin, farmland to destroy with over-fertilization…

  4. @dave stringer:

    1. “The amount spent did not change”. Thus, it reduced in real terms.
    2. “The change in R&D ‘investment’ is due to extra investment during the GFC”. Possibly, though some evidence of it would be useful.
    3. “The reduction in value of exports almost perfectly reflects the change in the value of the dollar against other currencies”. Nope, see the scale. It’s manufactured goods as a proportion of all exports. Thus, nothing to do with the exchange rate, which effects all exports.

  5. Just how stupid do you think we all are?

    The tertiary education change is due to reclassification of some spending, the amount spent did not change.
    The change in R&D “investment” is due to extra investment during the GFC now reducing to more affordable amounts,

    The reduction in value of exports almost perfectly reflects the change in the value of the dollar against other currencies, so when product is sold in a “commodity” currency such as the US dollar, the value received changes.

    As a wiseman said, there are lies, damned lies and (the misuse of) statistics!!!

Comments are closed.