Ryan Bridge: Should the government buy NZ made, even if it costs us more?

That's basically the question you've got to ask yourself after the latest wool snub.

This time it was Kāinga Ora saying no to Kiwi made woollen carpet for state houses, and yes to synthetic imported stuff. 

Why? It's cheaper.

We've been here before, you'll remember the school classrooms - same story.

It's happened again despite the coalition agreement deal with New Zealand First ensuring wool carped is used where practical - and that might be the caveat that Kāinga Ora is using here to get out of wool, the deal says that the local product has to be used in government procurement and in government buildings. 

But Kāinga Ora, like a good kid in class, has been listening to the government's main lecture which is cut costs. 

Wool is 30% more expensive on average than the nylon equivalent. 

But the industry says a deal with Kāinga Ora could revitalise a flailing product and its fortune. 

So we have a clash of competing priorities, cost versus localism. 

The answer to the question posed at the start of this is another question - what is the net benefit to New Zealand's economy as a whole of government buying wool carpet when you include the jobs that you would create, including the spending that you would encourage and the increased cost of wool on the taxpayer?

That surely is how you find the number that you would base a decision on whether to use a New Zealand made product over a synthetic imported equivalent. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Should the government buy something just because it's made here
in New Zealand, even if it costs us more. That's
basically the question you've got to ask yourself after the
latest wool snub. This time it was kying order saying
no in bold text, by the way to keyp we
made woolen carpet for state houses and yes to synthetic

(00:20):
imported stuff. Why it's cheaper. We've been here before, you'll
remember the school classroom's same story. And it happens despite
a coalition agreement deal with New Zealand first ensuring where practical,
and that might be the caveat that KAO is using
here to get out of wool, that the local product
be used in government procurement and in government buildings. But Ko,

(00:42):
like a good kid in class, has been listening to
the government's main lecture, which has cut costs. Wool is
thirty percent more expensive on average in carpets for state
houses than the nylon equivalent. But the industry, says KO,
and the deal could revitalize a flailing product and its fortunes.
So we have a clash of competing priorities cost versus localism.

(01:06):
The answer to the question posed at the start of
this is another question which is never It's kind of
annoying when people do that. But here we are what
is the net benefit to New Zealand's economy as a
whole of government buying wool carpet, including the jobs that
you would create, including the spending that you would encourage,
and the increased cost of wool on the taxpayer. That

(01:29):
surely is your number. That is the number that you
would base a decision on whether to use a New
Zealand made product over a synthetic, imported equivalent. For more
from Early edition with Ryan Bridge, listen live to News
Talk Set B from five am weekdays, or follow the
podcast on iHeartRadio.