Category: Welfare Reform
The National government's long awaited welfare reforms are at best a rehash of previous efforts to reduce the cycle of dependency. At worst, they may increase it. What better way to worsen inter-generational dependency than tell people on the DPB that if they want to avoid working they should have more children?
Speech to ACT Annual Conference, Wellington, 27 February 2010: As you know I run the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, a public policy think tank that produces the biggest weekly electronic newsletter in the country. It enables me to keep my finger on the pulse of public and political opinion. It is from this perspective that I would like to share some observations that might assist ACT in looking forward.
New Zealand’s welfare system is long overdue for reform. Far too many people are gaming the system. That’s not to deny that there are many deserving people who realistically will never be able to work and need the full support of the state. But the fact of the matter is that welfare has become a “soft touch” and almost everyone knows someone on welfare who shouldn’t really be there.
[New Zealand] is a beautiful place with boundless opportunity. So I won’t accept that the bottom third of the OECD for average income is where we rightfully belong. I simply won’t believe we have to put up with losing 80,000 of our people every year to other parts of the world. I am horrified that the gap between our wages and those in Australia are now wider than they have been in our history – at more than 35%. How can we hope to hold on to our young people, the educated, the talented, the motivated, if on the Monday you can earn $50,000 for doing one job and on the Friday earn $80,000 by simply moving across the ditch? If we stay on the same growth course and speed, by 2030 the gap between wages here and wages in Australia will have risen to over 60%. We have a plan to steer New Zealand on a course to a more prosperous future. And we need to get to work on that plan straight away. John Key, “National’s Blueprint for Change”, January 2008.
Most of today's benefits were created at the point of passing the Social Security Act 1938. During the post-war years benefit levels were reasonably stable despite population growth. For instance between 1940 and 1975 the population grew by 92 percent but receipt of Unemployment, Sickness and Invalid benefits grew by only 9 percent. As a percentage of working-age people, reliance on these benefits actually dropped.
I'm appalled that Mr Key thinks he is above the people and that his past promises (not to change the law) are more important than their wishes. Political parties are elected to govern the country according to the wishes of the majority. That's how democracy is supposed to work. In some circumstances, the majority view will be uninformed and the government may make laws that they think will provide a better result for society. But this is NOT one of those situations. I'm further appalled that he thinks that it's OK for him to just tell police how to enforce a law as has been reported in the news. That's not his or their job. It's his job to make laws that he thinks are correct and it's the police's job to enforce them without fear or favour. Then the courts decide if the police are correctly interpreting the law. The law is clearly against the wishes of the, by now, well-informed majority and MUST be changed or repealed. - a reader’s response to last week’s poll where 98% of informed NZCPR readers believe that the present anti-smacking law should be repealed.
The recent furore over the generosity of income support paid to sole parents on the Domestic Purposes Benefit (DPB) is symptomatic of an undercurrent of discontent within our society. Put bluntly, taxpayers are sick and tired of supporting people who could and should be working for a living. To their credit, National appears to be listening.
John Key has told the country he doesn't want to see any 16 or 17 year-olds on the benefit, a sentiment I am sure will find a good deal of sympathy, especially among National voters. The problem is, only the Independent Youth Benefit has been mentioned. That is the benefit usually available to unemployed youth.
A truly free society is one that releases the energies and creativity and abilities of everyone. It prevents some people from arbitrarily suppressing others. Freedom means diversity, but also mobility. It enables today’s disadvantaged to become tomorrow’s privileged, and, in the process, enables everyone from top to bottom, to enjoy a fuller and richer life. - Free to Choose, by Milton and Rose Friedman
While socialists have blamed capitalism and the free market for the global financial crisis, economist Richard M. Salsman holds “altruism” responsible. In his article “Altruism: The Moral Root of the Financial Crisis”, he explains that altruism, which is based on the notion that being moral consists of sacrificing oneself for the needs of others, has long been a driving force of government policy.[1] In the US, not only has this resulted in a burgeoning welfare state, but altruistic home ownership initiatives targeted at minority groups, created a house of cards of catastrophic proportions.
Loading ...
