It took becoming a mother to awaken an interest in politics in me. Having then become increasingly aware of the detrimental role welfare was playing in weakening family structure and what it meant for children, I developed an unfavourable view of big govt and extensive redistribution. In that context libertarianism made sense to me. I listened and read in that sphere, gravitating first to Lindsay Perigo's minor party (slogan - "Its enough to make you vote Libertarianz") and then ACT. During the 2000s the one person constantly drawing welfare dependence to the attention of the public was Muriel Newman. Time after time Muriel would appear in the Dominion or Evening Post exposing some new data or penning an opinion piece. I think she single-handedly kept a concern about welfarism to the fore, championing time limits and work expectations for single parents. She also worked hard on representing the rights of fathers and shared-parenting. When I campaigned for ACT in 2005, Muriel's name was the one that would come up. Her recognition factor was very strong.
Who in parliament today is making the kind of noise Muriel used to make? Obviously ACT are part of the government but as the election draws nearer there is nothing stopping them from pointing out that the welfare problem is only worsening, across all the important metrics. More people - including children - are on welfare and are staying there longer. But I don't even know who their welfare spokesperson is. Richard Prebble criticised ACT in yesterday's NZ Herald for producing an immigration policy and narrative without mentioning the welfare aspect - that NZers won't do the jobs immigrants will. This morning he told Ryan Bridge, "We have a benefit system where you can basically retire when you leave school."
National talks about their 'welfare reset' as if it is a major reform. But it hasn't made a dent in the worsening numbers. Between 2023/24 and 2024/25 the future expected years on welfare climbed yet again from 13.4 to 14.3 - not including time already spent on benefit.
Labour has a half-hearted go at blaming the government for high unemployment and too many NEETS (young people not in education, employment or training) but they know their own record isn't flash and they don't seem to know if they want more people on benefits ('the system needs to be more generous') or fewer ('we want good jobs for people').
The Greens are distinctly pro-welfare, championing the rights of beneficiaries over the rights of taxpayers. Who knows what the Maori Party wants in this space but it certainly wont be anything that hurts their voter base, and given Maori are more reliant on welfare than any other ethnicity, rattling dependency cages is highly unlikely.
And Opportunity? They want welfare for everyone in the form of a universal basic income (branded as Citizen's Income.)
So it is hardly surprising that the welfare issue does not rate amongst voter concerns when surveyed. It can nevertheless be linked to other areas people are worried about. I've already explained the immigration link. With health, recently ranked most important concern, welfare is a two way street. Without health, people can become dependent, and being dependent and unemployed leads people to becoming less healthy. The incapacity of mental ill-health is the biggest driver of the growth in people on JobSeeker/HCD (Health Condition or Disability) and Supported Living Payment. All of this is straining an already over-burdened health system.
If someone surveyed my biggest concern I would have no hesitation in responding, it's welfarism, and specifically, that almost a quarter of a million children are growing up in non-working, often dysfunctional, homes. That their life chances are diminished; that their risk of turning into their unemployed parents is high and as a country, we seem incapable of breaking the cycle. Violence towards children is increasing, births of children impaired in the womb through their mothers substance ingestion are increasing and our child protection services seem to be in a state of permanent flux.
It is beyond my comprehension why so little is ever said by our politicians about this shocking state of affairs. Have they been silenced by the colonial guilt variety of liberalism? Has this disproportionately Maori problem been handed, with funding and a degree of relief, to Whanau Ora? Are they hoping like hell the new Social Investment Agency - now under the control of a former MSD CEO - can perform miracles?
Who knows. What I am certain of is that problems don't go away because you don't talk about them. Talking about them is an essential prerequisite to progress. The wisdom of the crowd might also provide a steer in election year.
No comments:
Post a Comment