ACT leader David Seymour has confirmed he is drafting a member's bill calling for a debate on euthanaisa and will urge the Government to adopt the bill.
Saturday, June 06, 2015
Seymour doing what is desperately needed
This is great news and a relief:
Friday, June 05, 2015
The evidence that persuaded the govt to raise benefits
Before the budget I seem to remember the PM referring to 60,000 children in real poverty (haven't time now to chase down source). I wondered what definition he was using. Looks like the table below which measures items of deprivation. So 60,000 children have 11+ deprivations:
Table D.4
Cumulative distribution for
higher DEP-17 scores (% individuals), LSS 2008
DEP-17 score
|
6+
|
7+
|
8+
|
9+
|
10+
|
11+
|
ALL (%)
|
14
|
11
|
8
|
6
|
4
|
3
|
0-17 yrs (%)
|
21
|
17
|
13
|
10
|
8
|
6
|
# of children
|
220k
|
180k
|
140k
|
100k
|
80k
|
60k
|
# of households with children
|
110k
|
90k
|
70k
|
50k
|
40k
|
30k
|
Here is the table of items .
Table D.5
18 child-specific items used for
calibrating DEP-17 for school-aged children (aged 6-17 yrs)
Enforced
lack of essentials
|
Economised,
cut back or delayed purchases ‘a lot’ because money was
needed for other essentials (not just to be thrifty or to save for a trip or
other non-essential)
|
|
Two pairs
of shoes in a good condition that are suitable for daily activities (for each
child)
|
Child(ren)
continued wearing shoes or clothes that were worn out or the wrong size
|
|
Two sets of warm winter clothes for each child
|
Postponed
child’s visit to the dentist
|
|
A waterproof coat for each child
|
Postponed
child’s visit to the doctor
|
|
Fresh fruit and vegetables daily
|
Did not
pick up child’s prescription
|
|
A meal
with meat, fish or chicken (or vegetarian equivalent) each day
|
Unable to
pay for a child to go on a school trip or other school event
|
|
A separate bed for each child
|
Child(ren)
went without music, dance, kapa haka, art, swimming or other special interest
lessons
|
|
Enough bedrooms so that children aged over 10 of the
opposite sex are not sharing a room
|
Had to
limit your child(ren)’s involvement in sport
|
|
Have
children’s friends around to play and eat from time to time
|
Made do
with very limited space for children to study or play
|
|
Have children’s friends to a birthday party
|
||
All the
school uniform required by the school(s) for each child
|
This is a much better way of measuring hardship than simply measuring household income.
Then,
Main income source for
parents
·
Beneficiary
families have higher hardship rates than working families, with those who move
between benefit and work having rates somewhere in between.
·
Nevertheless,
at the less severe hardship levels (eg 7+) children in hardship are split
evenly between beneficiary and working families. This reflects the fact that there
are many more working families than beneficiary families.
·
Beneficiary
families are more likely than working families to be in more severe hardship,
though around a third of children in more severe hardship are from working
families (families that have no core benefit income at all).
Response - raise beneficiary income.
This data was from 2008. What will be most interesting is when, or if, the exercise is repeated, will the deprivation have eased. What would you expect?
(Sorry will have to sort the presentation later - but the link to the tables is above)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)