www.geocities.com/nzwomen/SusanStJohn/2002227letterIndependent.htm

 The Independent 27 February 2002

Dear Editor

Roger Kerr in recent times has made some astonishing claims about New Zealand's government spending/GDP ratio. In an article in the NZ Herald (January 17th 2002) he wrote that it was 'round 40% higher than the OECD average'! His usual claim is that it is just 'well above the OECD average'. I was delighted to see however that in the Independent (6th February - Agenda 2002: an election with vision) Roger Kerr talks about government spending but refrains from making these usual claims. So in spite of Wilkinson's letters (13 and 20th February) completely missing the point I have been complaining about, perhaps now the BRT realise they need to be more careful, and that using the OECD's total government spending/GDP ratio is an inappropriate measure for comparative purposes. Simple averages are best. The facts are New Zealand's ratio is below the OECD simple average and well below the median. Thus it is hard to sustain the BRT argument that we are out of line with the rest of the OECD. Engaging in these debates with the BRT seems lead to a curious overreaction. Did I really 'irresponsibly defame the BRT' as Wilkinson claims, and are the words 'ridiculous' and 'bluster' appropriate words in an academic debate?

Susan St John