Sunday, June 14, 2015

A frank admission from Anne Tolley, MSD Minister

Trying to reduce the numbers and plight of at-risk children is fraught area. The Minister says,
“At the moment there is little evidence of the effectiveness, or not, of funding in this sector, because up until now most contracts have focused on the numbers of clients receiving services, rather than the effect that the service has on improving the lives of vulnerable people.
She wasn't mounting an argument for social bonds but her admission allows me to.

Those opposing social bonds are missing this reality.

When it comes to social services, existing results are often abysmal. Performance is all about ticking boxes and the feel good factor.

I sympathize with those social workers who put in genuine and grinding effort yet can't demonstrate a real change. But within the current model, they keep their jobs.

Their salary is a debit to the taxpayer despite "little evidence of effectiveness" as the Minister puts it.

If the private sector could be persuaded to underwrite a programme with the promise of real results-based change, and a commensurate dividend, what is lost?

My only misgiving is that this is New Zealand.

A country that can't persuade people to invest in the stock exchange or business (because they are wedded to property investment) hasn't much chance of using social bonds as a regular way of funding the amelioration of social woes.




2 comments:

Anonymous said...

country that can't persuade people to invest in the stock exchange or business (because they are wedded to property investment)

It's not because of property investment. It's because of communism. Most Kiwis are born into state hospitals, attend state kindergartens, state schools, have jobs one way or another provided by the state, and even those that have private jobs get vast amount of state handouts, and of course all expect the state pension.

Forget better results. Forget competition. Forget the long tail. Getting rid of state involvement is worth it on its own grounds for precisely this reason. Getting rid of it drastically, quickly, without transition arrangements (like '91 but ten times as much) is crucial to ensure people never ever trust the state again, because it can always fail them!

Anonymous said...

The concept of welfare reminds me of the line from the film Field of Dreams - "Build it and they will come".