Recent sketches

Two recent efforts - one a commission, the other a gift for an 88th birthday.






Although I am still in the shop three months on, it is getting tough. I can pinpoint the turning point. The Christchurch earthquake. Maybe it was just coincidental (Sam says people are donating any spare money) but I haven't had a paying job since and will have to go into debt to pay the next rent instalment. Have printed and am delivering around 600 flyers so maybe that will produce a result. There are still lots of people saying they have plans to commission a work and occasionally someone walks through the door and buys a painting but I need to decide how in debt I am prepared to get. I don't give up easily :-)

We should be grateful

A comment came in overnight. It'll get no attention if I publish it at the post it responds to, When the DPB pays more than the average female wage and one would expect the author wants her thoughts noted.

goodkiwimum has left a new comment on your post "When DPB pays more than the average female worker...":

how dare you. you are the exact reason women and children grovel on in this country. one day lady you will be old and need my kids taxes to pay your effing "welfare". i expect this rubbish from men, not from women and especially not from mothers. if you are griping about wages, then gripe about wages. why will solo parents always be bandied about like the banner for misdeeds in this country. the dpb annually costs this country 2.9B, out of a total social welfare budget of 21B, where does the other 85% go, i dont effing care, over one hundered thousand families are looked after on that meagre portion of welfare, less than 10%of our adult population caring for the next generation, supporting your future. Meanwhile 122 mp's languish around doing little to improve our country, selling it off in fact and squabbling all day in some foolish kangaroo court, soaking up over 16M in wages alone. let alone expenses...oh and please dont get me started on all the self employed people who ritually screw their taxable income down to under half of what they should declare due to lax income tax laws for the privelaged and this is not costing us apparently. so yeah, you just keep on picking on women and children, we've done it for thousands of years, why stop now, we're just getting so bloody good at it now...
http://werewolf.co.nz/2011/02/ten-myths-about-welfare/

And I've just discovered a second comment in my junk tray;

oh yes and I quote "Moreover, other forms of unacceptable behaviour leave benefit fraud far behind in the dust without attracting the same negative stereotypes. The major foreign owned banks for instance finally agreed in late 2009 – and only after being pursued at great expense through the courts by the IRD – to cough up $2.2 billion of what they owed in unpaid taxes. Meaning : the settlement figure GREATER than the total amount lost in benefit fraud last year" all you people need to get over welfare and dig out the people who are really ripping this country off

Shocking waste

The really 'big' idea that comes out of the WWG report is the recommendation to move to a single benefit and extend employment services to most beneficiaries.

We propose that all people seeking welfare support would apply for Jobseeker Support. This common support would start with the assumption that people can work and would send strong signals about the value of paid work.

• Jobseeker stream – Most people who enter the system and apply for Jobseeker Support would be expected to take steps immediately to move into paid work, including applying for job vacancies. There would be clear signals about the consequences of not actively looking for work and the expectation that any reasonable job offer is to be accepted. A range of targeted support would be available, such as childcare support and job search assistance.

• Transition to work stream – For people with significant vocational and non-vocational barriers to securing and maintaining paid work there would still be the strong default expectation that they would transition into paid work, but there would be a more flexible, tailored approach to take account of their particular circumstances. Work-focused interviews, action plans and work related activity would be fundamental.

What intrigues me about this proposal is that Labour was on this track six years ago.

6821 (2005). Judith Collins to the Minister for Social Development and Employment (27 May 2005): In what ways is the new work-focused service for all beneficiaries expected to underpin, or move towards, the single core benefit?

Hon Steve Maharey (Minister for Social Development and Employment ) replied: The new service model, that is being trialled in 12 prototype sites, extends employment services to all beneficiaries, regardless of benefit type. Delivering services based on individual circumstances rather than benefit categorisation is integral to the concept behind the proposed single core benefit.

And...

3168 (2005). Judith Collins to the Minister for Social Development and Employment (09 Mar 2005): What is officials' current best estimate of the number of add-ons that will be required on top of the single benefit?

Hon Steve Maharey (Minister for Social Development and Employment ) replied: As part of the announcements in February 2005, I outlined three areas of additional support; accommodation, family support and disability. These are the subject of ongoing work.

And...

3162 (2005). Judith Collins to the Minister for Social Development and Employment (09 Mar 2005): Further to written question 2152 (2005), what has been the frequency of meetings of the group comprising senior officials from the Ministry of Social Development, Treasury, Department of Labour, Ministry of Health and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, which provides guidance on the co-ordination of the work programme and options for the development of the Government's plan to introduce a single core benefit, in the last 12 months?

Hon Steve Maharey (Minister for Social Development and Employment ) replied: The group comprising senior officials from the Ministry of Social Development, Treasury, Department of Labour, Ministry of Health and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, which provides guidance on the co-ordination of the work programme and options for the development of the Government's plan to introduce a single core benefit meets fortnightly or as required. The group’s first meeting was held on 13 August 2004. The group last met on 30 November 2004, further meetings are yet to be scheduled. This is also my response to written parliamentary question 3163 (2005) to 3165 (2005) and 3167 (2005).

And finally...

2263 (2005). Judith Collins to the Minister for Social Development and Employment (25 Feb 2005): What are the names and dates of any reports or written advice received during 2000 relating to the idea of a single benefit?

Hon Steve Maharey (Minister for Social Development and Employment ) replied: There are three reports relating to the idea of a single benefit that fall within the scope of the member’s question. These are: * 15 June 2000 Social Assistance: Paper One: The Context and Reconfiguring the Community Wage * 12 September 2000 Social Assistance Strategy: Goals and Work Programme * 1 December 2000 Benefit Design: Social Security Benefits for those of Working Age

So not such a new or radical idea after all. A mass of reports, trials, and high level meetings done and dusted and back to square one.

And just one more question from me.

How much time and money do government and bureaucrats waste?

Aotearoa - "safe and wholesome"

Sue Bradford has certainly become more extreme since leaving parliament. About the WWG, last week this was reported;

Former Green MP Sue Bradford said the group seemed to be "looking to Nazi Germany for inspiration, with its underpinning 'work makes free' philosophy, attempted eugenic control of a portion of the population, and its potential racist implications for Maori".

How do you derive that from a report that essentially finds there are far too many people, disproportionately Maori, living off the extremely-stretched public purse because they have children to care for and no jobs, and to at least arrest the problem they should be offered free contraception?

Then yesterday she started blogging about 'baby farms' (next it'll be 'baby-farmers' conjuring up images of the baby killer Minnie Dean, forgetting we have many more recent examples of people who killed their own children). She is reacting to the proposal that the limit of childcare centres rolls be raised from 50 to 150. But this is the statement that stunned me.

And what of the wellbeing of the staff attempting to provide care and education in conditions more reminiscent of Eastern Europe than of safe, wholesome little Aotearoa?

Aotearoa, safe and wholesome?

You mean since the removal of section 59 Sue? I must have missed that.