Clients with psychiatric conditions (including JS-HCD clients) now represent 17% of the benefit system client base.The figure has been constantly growing and represents around 50,000 individuals.
74% of under 25 year old clients (88% for youth benefit clients) were supported by parents (or a parent) on benefits while they were a child.The clearest evidence yet of the inter-generational transmission of benefit dependence.
126,126 main benefit clients (or 40%) live in a household with two or more people receiving a main benefit.The is brand new data. This number is 43 percent of all beneficiaries. It would be fascinating to know how many households contain them. But certainly some 'overcrowding' is quite possibly a choice as multiple benefits going into one home can result in not insignificant net household incomes.
The more people in a household receiving a main benefit, the higher the per person average liability. This is the case across all benefit categories, suggesting that clients living in households with more than one person receiving a main benefit may experience different barriers to employment. Those living in multi-beneficiary households are also likely to be younger on average and more likely to be Māori.
Again, no surprises here.
Nearly one-third of clients receiving a main benefit have some form of Corrections history.Conversely, approximately one-quarter of people with a Corrections historyProbably lots of overlap with those with psychiatric conditions mentioned earlier.
are receiving a main benefit.
Average liability is consistently higher for people with a Corrections history across all benefit categories (with the exception of youth benefits), genders and ethnicities.Liability in the benefit system is still cheaper than a liability in the prison system. Had to find something positive to say.
(Will report further if warranted. Up to P12 currently.)
7 comments:
More than one beneficiary per household..
That rang a bell..
http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/sites/all/files/publications/555108-cab-paper-six-monthly-report-mcop-april2013.pdf
I think I got this from your blog and it shows the strongest determinant to hardship (at 22%) was living in a deprived area.
So now we can join up a few strings.. living in a house with more than one beneficiary that is possibly overcrowded and located in a deprived area are (the?) major
factors in determining long term dependence and other disadvantages.
There's very limited potential for good examples, mentoring and character building in these circumstances.
JC
There's very limited potential for good examples, mentoring and character building in these circumstances.
you're assuming this would help - there is absolutely no evidence that it does. The problem is structural: money for nothing. The solution is also structural: remove the money.
BS anon. The report has evidence by way of the Youth Service, and I've witnessed the difference mentoring makes with my own eyes. No, it's not a guarantee. There may even be more losses than gains. But your particular brand of low - or rather no - expectations bigotry is ill-founded. Some kids have never had a positive word come their way until school.
"Some kids have never had a positive word come their way until school."
And if such kids meet up with these teachers then we have another string of disadvantage.
http://www.education.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/news/news-2014/2014/05/05/thesis-reveals-racist.html
To digress by way of example.. in 2006 George Bush was losing Iraq to insurgents and terrorism. His troops turned up in the middle of the night and killed the terrorists they found in the neighbourhoods along with civilian collateral damage.
But then younger generals and colonels persuaded Bush to change tack and send his troops into the neighbourhoods permanently. Suddenly instead of the US guns pointing *into* the neighbourhoods they were pointing *out* at the terrorists. The troops were now living and sharing the risks with the civilians and cooperation increased enormously.. within a year or so civilian casualties went from over 3000 a month to under 50.
If we want our authorities to improve deprived neighbourhoods they need to be living there along with their families sharing the experience and providing the example and help from *within* the community.
The statistics tell us that Maori are in proportionate terms our top volunteers.. if the authorities (Whanau Ora?) were to organise these people then the firewood would be supplied to the old and solo mums, cleaners would go through the houses in a cloud of Janola and free nappies, groups would clean up the sections and exteriors of the houses and neighbourhood watch groups would patrol the streets with cell phones at the ready.
You don't fix failing neighbourhoods by pointing the policy guns in but by getting in and mucking out.
JC
JC,
I didn't live there but "mucked in" for 5 years. Turning up with my vacuum cleaner, a bucket of cleaning products, rubbish bags, lawn mower and lots of enthusiasm. Didn't always look forward to it but never failed to come away richer for the experience. Typically I would lose contact with a family as they or I (was) moved on, so it's hard to ascertain success but I remain very much there for one family on a personal level. Even a low strike rate would make a big difference if more people got involved.
Thanks for reminding me of the value of getting involved as I look for new avenues.
You don't fix failing neighbourhoods by pointing the policy guns in
but by sending the police guns in - and letting them do their jobs.
Oh that's right: NZ's cops don't have guns and aren't allowed to use 'em even if they did
I've witnessed the difference mentoring makes with my own eyes. No, it's not a guarantee. There may even be more losses than gains.
more losses than gains means it's useless.
But your particular brand of low - or rather no - expectations bigotry is ill-founded.
I don't have low expectations: I just think people rationally follow the money. While the dole and DPB and WFF and super are there, people will bludge. When they are not - as in Singapore, China, Hong Kong, and for illegal immigrants, even in the USA and UK and, gosh, NZ - people work.
Post a Comment