Thursday, August 06, 2020

Have a baby every three years and you'll never have to get a job

National's 'subsequent child' policy said a woman who has another baby on welfare would still have work obligations when that child turns one. It wasn't discouraging the habit though because seven years after implementation (in 2019) 6,000 babies were still  being born onto an existing benefit.

But a war isn't abandoned just because a battle is lost.  You mount another battle, a different strategy.

Not this government. They simply surrendered, held up a white flag saying, "Have a baby every three years and you'll never have to get a job."

Labour says this is 'kind' to mothers who should not be expected to work in the first 1,000 days of their babies life. A luxury denied to mothers who return to work to pay mortgages and taxes. Stuff reported:

ACT employment spokeswoman Nicole McKee, who is a candidate for the party outside Parliament, said Labour was “promoting welfare as a lifestyle option and will harm kids in benefit-dependent households”.

“Many couples wait to start families in order to ensure they can afford to feed, clothe, house and support their children. Those couples who wait and plan are being forced to subsidise those whose lifestyle is dependent on welfare,” she said.

But consider this also. 

Children born in 2010, whose caregiver spent more than 80% of their next five years on a benefit, would be 38 times more likely to experience maltreatment by age two than those with no benefit history. 

This 'kick-start' sends children off on a downward spiral. 

Most of the mothers having babies on welfare are 'single' and disproportionately Maori.

Thanks to  Sensible Sentencing Trust research into the sentencing notes of 100 male offenders over 18 who have committed serious crimes- Murder, Manslaughter, Rape, Sexual Assault - we now know that most were brought up by a single mother or had migrated into the care of grandparents or OT.

The Labour/Green ideology does not value stable two-parent families despite eons of evidence proving they are good for children.

It appals me that not only do they blindfold themselves to the facts but barge off pigheadedly in the opposite direction. And the Children's Commissioner support for this latest move utterly dismays.



Brendan McNeill said...

All this from a Government that wants to end 'child poverty'.

If you wanted to formulate a policy that would create a self perpetuating underclass in New Zealand, you couldn't improve on Labour's current strategy. What happens to children who fall prey to the outcomes produced by this ideology is nothing less than evil.

If this were not bad enough, it is supported, applauded, celebrated and condoned by none less than the Children's Commissioner.

Of all the feckless, stupid, wrong headed policies initiated by this Government this is by far the worst. We can recover from failures in housing, transport, education and even health, but you cannot reverse the impact of State funded poverty, learned helplessness and dependency in a single generation, if ever.

This is dispiriting reading Lindsay, but thank God you are reporting it, and at least attempting to shift public opinion.

John Hurley said...

How much per week does a solo mother get with accommodation supplement. $925/week?

Lindsay Mitchell said...

John, It depends on how many children she supports, their ages and the region she lives in. And even then there are discretionary top-ups she might qualify for.

Zoroforever said...

Your data on such matters is like a beacon of light in a very dark room.
When I discuss these types of figures with friends on both sides of the spectrum they look at me like I've just arrived from Mars. When I ask them if they have ever read anything you have published they say Lindsay who? Ask them if they have heard or read anything by Thomas Sowell and I get an even bigger blank face from them.
The ordinary middle class people in NZ have never bothered to explore the links between poverty and crime etc with the growth of welfare. Beecroft just suggests throwing more petrol on the fire.

Lindsay Mitchell said...

Thank you Zoroforever. The subject (the links between poverty and crime etc) should be taught in school. As they say, snowflake's chance in hell... there's something of a pun therein:-)

Brendan McNeill said...


I note that name suppression has been lifted from the suspected murderer of the Auckland Policeman. It would be insightful to understand the 'family background' of Eli Epiha.

If it transpires that he was a product of welfare dependant, solo parenting, dysfunction, then in a very real sense, those who advocate for such polices are culpable. I don't know if there is anyway we are allowed to know such things, but it strikes me that we need to keep calling out these policies, not just because they are immoral, but because of the outcomes they produce. Not just for the children affected, but also the innocent people they end up harming, often killing, from babies to (potentially) policemen.

Zoroforever said...

Amen to that