The latest monthly benefit data was released yesterday.
Here are three observations.
There are more Cook Islanders on benefits in New Zealand than the Cook Island's entire working-age population
Cook Island's resident population doesn't fluctuate much.
According to the Cook Islands Statistics Office around 12,000 resident Cook Islanders were aged 15 and over.
Here in New Zealand, at October 2025, there are 14,469 Cook Islanders on a benefit.
I wonder how many Cook Islanders are on benefits in China?
Over the last thirty years benefit dependence due to ill health and disability has grown from one in five to one in two
In 1995 73,723 people received a sickness or invalid benefit - 21.8% of all beneficiaries. Today 49.4% receive the equivalent benefits.
Even when - or if - unemployment reduces, most of these people will remain dependent with an ever-increasing portion suffering from mental illness.
At 411,012 in October 2025, New Zealand has its highest absolute number of beneficiaries ever
In 1992, when unemployment peaked at over 10 percent, there were 340,715 people receiving a main benefit.
Then, according to MSD: "The number of clients receiving an income tested benefit at 31 December increased from 399,071 to 401,415 between 1998 and 1999 but has declined for the last four years."
The next peak was the GFC when the number reached 352,707.
What about the Covid crisis? Numbers peaked at 389,601 in January 2021 and then abated.
Now, at 411,012 in October 2025, New Zealand has the highest absolute number of beneficiaries ever.
And by Christmas, the predictable seasonal high will take us to another new record.
3 comments:
1) How comparable are the 1992 and 2025 definitions of beneficiary?
2) The per capita ratio of beneficiaries to population in 1992 was about 1:10 (boosted by unemployment) and in 2025 it was 1:13, an apparent improvement - though how much an improvement, if any, given the lower unemployment rate today, I don’t know.
On a kind of semi-related note, as I drove past the umpteenth road cone extraganza with young men in in hard hats and hi-viz vests yesterday, I thought that 40 years they would have been leaning on shovels beside a railway line.
Ps. Please don’t interpret points one and two as criticisms of your invaluable blog, which I have been reading for many years, and which (along with particularly the works of the great American public intellectual, Thomas Sowell, and others) moved my political orientation from the Values Party to National an then Act.
Hi Dave,
1/ In 1992 I counted Unemployment; Training (very small number); Sickness; Invalid; Domestic Purposes and Widows benefits. In 2025 these equate to Jobseeker; Jobseeker /Health or Disability Condition; Supported Living Payment and Sole Parent Support. So very comparable. National just changed the longstanding names of sickness, invalid and domestic purposes in their 2013 reforms.
2/ I was careful to note I referred to absolute numbers as opposed to percentages. In 1992 around 16% of the working age was on a benefit and now it is 12.6% so an 'improvement' on paper. But, as you point out, in 1992 unemployment was high therefore much of the dependency was short-lived.
The duration of stay on welfare has increased enormously. Ideally dependence should be measured not just in headline numbers but degree of reliance.
Hope this answers your questions.
Thanks.
Dave
Post a Comment