NATIONAL'S WELFARE REFORM PROPOSALS DON'T GO FAR ENOUGH
Sunday, August 14, 2011
The welfare reform proposals that relate to young people on benefits announced today don't go far enough, welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell said today.
"Allowing the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Social Development to share information about school leavers going on welfare should never have been stopped in the first place. "
"Attaching obligations and money management regimes to benefits received by 16 and 17 year-olds, and 18 year-old sole parents, is an improvement on the status quo. However, many single parents enter the benefit system older than 18 still without the maturity or wherewithal to raise a child. Which begs the question, why draw an arbitrary line at 18?"
"The new message being sent is, if you go on the DPB at 19 you won't get hassled. "
"Today's announcement is a good start but doesn't go nearly far enough. Not only is it vital that existing teen parents are required and supported to continue their own education or training, but that more potential sole parents are discouraged from choosing or defaulting to the benefit lifestyle."
"Strict time limits across all ages would act as such a deterrent."
"If the government is serious about reducing New Zealand's very high teenage birthrate and the associated deprivation, it should promise an end to 16-17 year-old eligibility, and time limits - with some exemptions - extended to all others."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
"If the government is serious about reducing New Zealand's very high teenage birthrate and the associated deprivation, it should promise an end to 16-17 year-old eligibility, and time limits - with some exemptions - extended to all others."
Come on Lindsay. It's time you faced the facts.
We don't need more (more expensive) hand-holding; we don't need time limits; we don't need complicated case management, vast arrays of laws about eligibility and benefits and responsibilities.
JUST STOP IT
just stop the whole damn mess of benefits.
16 or 60; 18 or 80. NO WELFARE
That's the single most important change - indeed the only real change the government could ever make.
"National's welfare reform proposals don't go faST enough"
That is the correct title for your post.
When you do not know how far the journey is to be, you are probably guilty of incomplete thought.
Keep up the good work but identify the target carefully.
I'm sure you know that this is a moving target.
db..
Lindsay, they have to make a start somewhere, it can be improved on over time.
they have to make a start somewhere, it can be improved on over time.
They are just taking more taxes from the very few productive people in NZ and paying it to WINZ workers, "charities", and other do-gooders.
When you do not know how far the journey is to be,
We do know how far the journey is: nothing less than an end to all welfare in NZ - starting with benefits, then education & health (the big three) and the trimming out all the little things.
With ACT in Coalition, we certainly could have
expected a solid effort on at least one of those fronts by the end of the first term).
We got nothing. Less than nothing
Time limit on all benefits, state schools & state hospitals.
Time limit of ZERO
Anon 6:45pm
We (my husband and I) are productive high income tax payers, but there has to be a start somewhere to dismantle the socialist welfare state. It is what is destroying western civilization but I fear it is too far gone.
but there has to be a start somewhere to dismantle the socialist welfare state
Look at the Riots in the UK & Europe, we don't have much time left!
Terminating all benefits in NZ would take nothing more than an order in council. It could literally be done overnight.
Post a Comment