Wednesday, February 10, 2010


Tough? That's what The NZ Herald headline says.


OK. Let me read this from the viewpoint of a beneficiary.

I'm on the DPB but my kids are only aged 2 and 3. So this isn't going to affect me for four years yet. And even then, the change is being phased in over several years. So that might push it out for another 2 or 3. Mr Key was talking about what getting 5 percent of parents with children aged 6 or older would save the country, so obviously their expectations that I am going to go to work aren't that high. And even if they do tell me I have to do something in 2017 say, it's only 15 hours a week. 3 hours a day. I can do some sort of course at home while I ease my way back into the workforce. Anyway, might have another kid by then, in which case none of this matters.

I'm a 16 year-old girl who has grown up on welfare but I really want my own space, I really want to get away from my pain in the arse mother. If I got pregnant, like Mum did, it wouldn't really matter. I can still get the DPB (and a place of my own) for six years at least. That's an age. Oh, and I can fast-track it all by getting on the sickness benefit first.

I'm on a sickness benefit because I have alcohol-related depression. What does all this mean? I have to jump through some more hoops? Big deal. They've already been making me do that anyway. I've already been signed off by that 'designated doctor' WINZ sent me to.

Nobody should be under any illusion that National is getting tough on welfare. They should be red-faced over these window-dressing gestures. Really. It's nothing more than 'been there, done that'.

(Rider; Not all beneficiaries think like this. But those who do not, are not the problem.)


Sinner said...

he number of people receiving a Sickness or Invalids Benefit in particular has been allowed to grow out of control in recent times. Without any fundamental changes, this number is expected to keep growing over the longer term, by perhaps 50 percent over the next 15 years.

Key can't do maths. With a 16% increase this year,
A 50% increase takes 3 years, not 15!

Accordingly, this year the Government will appoint a working group of experts to recommend ways in which we can reduce long-term welfare dependency and thereby reduce the welfare bill future generations will face.

We will know very simply if he is serious - if Lindsay is on the task-force. Or me :-)

As it is: there is only one sustainable solution to controlling welfare dependency - remove welfare.
And only one practical way to do that: simply cancel the lot.

Anonymous said...

Its never going to change. Not here. Ever.

Anonymous said...

Its never going to change. Not here. Ever.

Yes it is - just not in the way you'd like.

NZ is barely above the level of countries like Iceland, Ireland, and Greece. We cannot pay our own way with exports, so we're borrowing money overseas like mad.

The issue of the banks being Aussie-owned is neither here nor there: the Aussie govt isn't going to bail us out or support their banks to bail us out.

Sooner - especially at the One Billion Unpayable Per Month we're adding on to the debt mountain - we'll be out of money. They Kiwi will collapse down to 10c US or even less. We won't be able to pay our loans. The Government, the NZ corporate sector and NZ households will all be effectively bankrupt.

Then things will change!

We have a choice: stop welfare, education, healthcare and all the rest of the stuff we already can't afford - stop it, now, fast, and keep the taxes up until we've paid off the debt and there's enough in the govt coffers to cover those debts -

or sooner, rather than later, watch as we follow Iceland and Argentina.

Anonymous said...

Oh right, stop welfare, education and healthcare. What superb logic. You're not by any chance a libertarian are you?