Australia doubles benefit rates

Australia will double benefit rates to deal with coronavirus:

Source

People newly made redundant will have financial commitments well beyond the prior Newstart Allowance (but wasn't that always the case for individuals before this crisis?)

To meet these needs, and as a result, everybody on a benefit pre-March 20 has it doubled. 

It's only for 6 months ...

BUT what will the reaction be when benefits are halved??

Stuff from a small town in New Zealand

From the hinterland, the back blocks of rural heartland, one of my favourite commentators and artists Mark Wahlberg has started a blog Inside Pahiatua looking Out. We aren't overly blessed with views directly from and about small towns in New Zealand. Especially not of this nature. Linking to it in 'blogs I read'.

It is desirable to close the margin between benefit and employment income

Oh wait. Did I get that right?

Here's a quote I used recently when opposing the linking of benefits to wage inflation:

 "...it is desirable to create a margin between being dependent on a benefit and being in employment....
The Labour Party isn’t the party that says living on a benefit is a preferred lifestyle. Its position has always been that the benefit system is a safety net for those who are unavoidably unable to participate in employment. From its history, the Labour Party has always been about people in employment."
Michael Cullen, 2008

Yes NZ is facing an economic crisis. But I fear government response will make it worse.

Wage subsidies come with the proviso that the employer pays the employee a minimum of 80 percent of his existing wages. So the employee will be taking a 20 percent cut in income.

At the same time the beneficiary will be getting an 11-17 percent increase in the Jobseeker rate (plus any annual increase for wage inflation and the winter energy payment).

Lifting benefits when wages are heading south seems particularly foolhardy. I am seriously worried that we may see a repeat of the early nineties when benefit dependency reached 16 percent and large numbers of  unemployed never worked again with many migrating to sickness and invalid benefits.

God forbid.

Greens: "It doesn't matter why you can't work..."

In the permissive tradition made famous by Metiria Turei, Greens co-leader Marama Davidson says: "It doesn't matter why you can't work - you should be able to immediately receive support." She wants stand-down periods permanently abolished and benefit rates increased substantially. This is in response to the coronavirus. But their desire for a sanction-free, no-questions-asked benefit system is well known.

It is staggering how pervasive welfare has become since its very first inception as the stringently policed old-age pension. A prospective recipient had to make application to a magistrate with proof of age, citizenship and good character. The names of those granted a pension were published in daily newspapers.

Until the 1960s clauses remained in benefit legislation to the effect that the applicant had to be sober and of good character and must not have caused their own incapacity to work. These disappeared as gate-keeping became increasingly difficult and society adopted a more 'progressive' attitude to need.

From then numbers exploded.

While Davidson is effectively saying it doesn't matter if you make yourself unemployable, actually she is only giving voice to the current state of affairs anyway. Thousands of  addicts, and criminals - past and present -  have their livelihoods paid for by the law-abiding. Thousands of parents chose to rely on the taxpayer instead of a partner to raise their children. Thousands of individuals have become inter-generational dependents as a result.

Are we a better country for the Green's (current political manifestation) brand of liberalism and non-judgementalism?

We may be. But if I was going to bat for children I'd say 'no'.

(It is one thing to extend kindness and care working one-on-one with beneficiaries and prisoners. A personal relationship includes personal knowledge about circumstances. But it does not follow that a society should apply a blanket approach of unquestioning and uncritical 'compassion'.)

Labour's lack of consistent philosophy

These are extremely unusual times. 'Stay calm and carry on' is my preferred mode of action.

A side effect of this flux is the exposure of Labour's lack of a core, consistent approach to assistance.

Under Finance Minister, Bill English, National was developing a highly targeted approach to need. Actuarial analysis was used to find who the most economically vulnerable and potentially costly were and efforts concentrated accordingly.

Along comes Labour and puts up election bribes like:

- Fees Free first year

- Best Start

- Energy Winter Payment

Each of these was cash assistance regardless of assets or income.Not once did they explain why they were prepared to give money to people who didn't need it.

Now Grant Robertson (who I rate in that party) is talking about the government's targeted response. He stresses how careful the government must be to meet only genuine and urgent need. Quite rightly.

But square it please.

Increase in Asian mothers greater than all other groups combined

The matter of falling fertility caught my attention last year when I produced this paper for Family First.

NZ's fertility rate had dropped to an all-time low (like many other developed countries) in 2018. The 2019 data is now available and the birth rate has increased slightly to 1.75.

Predictably most of the increase is to mothers 30 and over. The increase in births by ethnicity is charted below. There were almost twice as many more Asian mothers than all the others combined. (1,203 versus 678)

Important note from data: "Each birth is included in every ethnic group specified. For this reason, some births are counted more than once and responses sum to more than the total number of births."

Birth data does not use a hierarchical system whereby Maori gets prioritised when there are multiple ethnicities. Here I have used 'mothers' as opposed to 'children' because mothers state fewer ethnicities than they do for their child, understandably. Mothers sum to 68,007 whereas children sum to 77,505. Total births for the year on the other hand is given as 59,637.

Parents on benefits continue having babies

Media Release: Parents on benefits continue having babies

March 3, 2020

Lindsay Mitchell, Welfare Commentator and researcher


In 2019 over 6,000 babies were added to an existing benefit.

"Information released to me under the OIA shows that 6,190 caregivers had added one or more 'subsequent children' aged less than 12 months to their benefit during 2019. That represents one in ten of all babies born last year.  For Maori the ratio doubles to one in five."

Having more babies when unable to independently provide for existing children entrenches long-term dependency. Children on a benefit from birth are more likely to experience abuse and neglect, material hardship, poorer health and educational outcomes, and contact with the justice system.

"To disincentivise adding children, in 2012 the National government introduced a policy whereby the requirement to return to part-time work when the youngest child turned five (later reduced to three) could not be delayed by having another baby. "

In the prior years 2006-2010 the annual average number of subsequent children born to parents on benefit was 4,800.* The situation appears to have worsened since.

"From July 2018 parents on benefits were paid an additional $60 weekly for new born children. 'Best Start' payments apply whether or not the baby is a 'subsequent child.' "

National disincentives and Labour incentives present a mixed and ultimately unsuccessful message as New Zealand fails to deal with the root of so many social problems.



*https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/regulatory-impact-statements/ris-welfare-reform-phase-one-social-security-amendment-bill-no1-.pdf

Indian migrants appearing in courts more often than Mongrel Mob members?

Shane Jones' adding- insult- to- injury comments are intriguing:

"I challenge anyone in New Zealand to disagree with me in terms of the sad regularity with which we are seeing egregious cases of abuse, in the media, coming from the Indian migrant community upon their own. In fact, they're appearing in courts with more regularity than the Mongrel Mob."

You would assume that "egregious" cases of abuse would earn at least a community sentence if not a term in prison. Yet Asian and other offenders make up just 4-5% of prisoners or offenders with a community sentence.

In 2015  nine percent of the prison population was Mongrel Mob. By 2018 the number had climbed to around 11 percent.

I suppose there could be some quirk such as all convicted Indian offenders are deported?? But even then they would serve their prison sentence first. Any other ideas that might back up Jones' claim?

Growing failure of biological parents to care for their children

"Unsupported Child’s Benefit is a weekly payment which helps carers supporting a child or young person whose parents can't care for them because of a family breakdown."

"Orphan’s Benefit is a weekly payment which helps carers supporting a child or young person whose parents have died or can't be found, or can’t look after them because they have a long-term health condition or incapacity."

I included these when recently asking MSD how many more children were dependent on benefits.

Children on these benefits have risen by 18 percent from December 2017 to December 2019.

Yet again we see Maori children way over-represented. 

Many of these children will be in whangai, foster or grandparent care. Anecdotally (listening to grandparents raising grandchildren) drugs are a large part of the problem.

Apart from a small number of tragedies (Orphan's benefit only represents 2 percent of the total numbers) the growing columns largely reflect a failure of biological parents to provide care.

(The growth is not the result of the law change to allow dependent children to stay in foster care till an older age. In each and every single year age-band the numbers have increased. Babies under 1 year  increased by 44%)

Just 7 percent of Jobseeker beneficiaries had part-time work at year end

One explanation for why Jobseeker numbers continue to climb despite the unemployment rate staying low might be part-time employment.

An individual can receive a Jobseeker benefit if they are working part-time. So under the OIA I asked MSD how many Jobseeker recipients had part-time jobs. I have graphed the data they supplied:

Only 7.3% of Jobseeker beneficiaries had a part-time job at December 31 - 5.2% of Maori and 9.4 percent of NZ European.

But this is point-in-time data and doesn't tell me about seasonal workers for example. MSD fact sheets once gave the percentage of beneficiaries who had earnings for the prior year.

Though obsolete it'd be useful to look at one of those fact sheets. The last to record this info was December 2012 - pre-welfare reforms. Of those on the old unemployment benefit:

• 12 percent had a current earnings declaration for their current spell on benefit. This indicates some participation in paid work (during the last 12 months) while receiving a main benefit.

Not a great deal higher.

Blog followers will know I have been particularly intrigued by the mismatch between low unemployed but high Jobseeker numbers for Maori.

Given all of the above I am still stumped as to why over 58,000 Maori are receiving a jobseeker benefit while fewer than 30,000 are unemployed.


(To be continued)

140% increase in housing wait list since 2017

Latest stats just released by MSD

Here's the longer term back story:

Almost 12,000 more children on benefits

Almost 12,000 more children on benefits

February 25, 2020

Lindsay Mitchell, Welfare commentator and researcher


Data released under the Official Information Act today reveals almost 12,000 more children are dependent on welfare benefits since December 2017.

"At 31 December 2019 there were 206,395 children aged 0-18 reliant on caregiver on a main benefit (185,930), Young Parent Payment (1,531) or Orphan/ Unsupported Child benefit (18,934). That's 6 percent higher than at December 31, 2017."

Of the 59,637 births during 2019 10,882 babies were welfare-dependent by year end. Nearly one in five. Over half - 57% - were added to an existing benefit.

New Zealand's child poverty problem cannot be solved when high numbers of children live in non-working homes. Raising benefits and reducing the income margin between work and welfare will only incentivise more people to opt for welfare. This normalises benefit dependency for their children and the habit becomes inter-generational.

In 2008 Finance Minister Michael Cullen said, "...it is desirable to create a margin between being dependent on a benefit and being in employment....
The Labour Party isn’t the party that says living on a benefit is a preferred lifestyle. Its position has always been that the benefit system is a safety net for those who are unavoidably unable to participate in employment. From its history, the Labour Party has always been about people in employment."

The more the current Labour government ignores this, the more intractable the child poverty problem will become.

Cullen wouldn't have linked benefits to wages

Indexing benefits to wages is setting a precedent. They've been indexed to inflation since 2001 but this move has always been resisted.

For many people the margin between income from a benefit and income from work is a cost they are prepared to pay. Fix that margin and they will always be prepared to pay it. Increase the margin and work becomes attractive.

The previous Labour government understood this.

 "...it is desirable to create a margin between being dependent on a benefit and being in employment....
The Labour Party isn’t the party that says living on a benefit is a preferred lifestyle. Its position has always been that the benefit system is a safety net for those who are unavoidably unable to participate in employment. From its history, the Labour Party has always been about people in employment."
Michael Cullen, 2008

Stop promising, Jacinda

Given child poverty reduction isn't playing well for Jacinda, she might reflect on this piece of realism and honesty from Don Brash as National opposition leader in 2005:

When asked to guarantee his policies would not lead to an increase in child poverty, Don Brash told Morning Report "look there's a cycle of these things, they go up and down. I can't promise anything in that area."

It's bat shit crazy to vow to reduce child poverty given  the many measures with relativity as the mainstay anyway.

Kids will do better when the adults and the country they live in does better.

Normalising methamphetamine

Reported in a soundbite during tonight's TV One News the italicised finding below.

The press release from which the soundbite arose:

Methamphetamine Use And Its Impact On Violence Laid Bare In World-first Study
Wednesday, 19 February 2020, 2:33 pm
Press Release: University of Otago
Almost a third of middle-aged New Zealanders have tried methamphetamine at least once, according to a new University of Otago, Christchurch study looking at the link between using the drug and violence in the general population.

"Almost a third" is 28%; "middle-aged" is 35 and  "New Zealanders" were 1,000 individuals born in Canterbury.

The other big market for meth is Australia. According to Flinders University in Adelaide:

In 2013, 7% of Australians reported that they had used methamphetamine in their lifetime, and 2% reported using in the past 12 months."

"In their lifetime" is a much larger window than by age 35 but read on.

Probably the most reliable NZ source for the prevalence of drug use is the Ministry of Health's  NZ Drug Survey which finds:

In 2015/16, 1.1 percent of adults (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.9–1.5) used amphetamines in the past year. This equates to about 34,000 New Zealanders.

1.1% is much lower than 2%, the Australian finding. Which calls into question the discrepancy between "middle-aged" and lifetime findings.

Back to the Christchurch Study press release:

"The findings show use of methamphetamine is common, as observed in the study’s cohort of middle-aged New Zealanders. According to Christchurch Health and Development data, methamphetamine is the third most common illicit drug after cannabis and ecstasy, Professor Boden says
...He cautions while methamphetamine use increases the risk of involvement in violence most people who used the drug did not engage in violence or experience violence in others.

I appreciate the study focuses on meth and associated violence and that is useful.

But what I heard - and subsequently read - was the message that methamphetamine usage is "common".

I've never used it. In my life I've used cannabis three times and wouldn't expect that to contribute to any claim about usage prevalence today.

Unemployment Rate versus Jobseeker Receipt by region

Here the official unemployment rate (from the HLFS) is charted against the receipt of Jobseeker benefit (from MSD fact sheets) by region at December 2019.

Only Auckland and Otago have a higher unemployment rate than % of the (local) working age population receiving a Jobseeker Benefit.

All of the areas with large discrepancies have high Maori populations. This is consistent with the discrepancy when charted on ethnicity alone.

My current conclusion is that many Maori in those regions are not unemployed but working part-time or seasonally so still entitled to the Jobseeker benefit.

Lowering the prison population: At what cost?

There are people in prison who shouldn't be there. And there are people who aren't in prison who should be there. 

According to Police, reported crime is up 7.1% in the year to November 2019 and "Serious Assault Resulting in Injury victimisations increased by 39.5% compared with the previous 12 months." There is some qualification about change in assault classifications but it isn't conclusive.

The most common reason for a prison sentence is violence. 

Yet the Ministry of Justice says, "Compared to 2017/2018 a smaller percentage of adults received prison sentences in 2018/2019, while the percentage receiving more serious community sentences continued to increase." (My emphasis)

Also, "The number of adults receiving a prison sentence increased between 2013/2014 and 2016/2017, however over the past year it has decreased from 8,130 people (13%) in 2017/2018 to 6,883 (12%) in 2018/2019. This has brought the number of adults receiving a prison sentence back to levels seen before the increase." 

It is to be hoped that the crimes not sending people to prison are of the 'lesser' variety. Though if you were a victim or theft or burglary (up respectively 7.6 and 6.3%) you may not agree.

I blogged recently that I agree with Andrew Little's goal to lower the prison population but not at any cost.

Butt covering or sheer incompetence?

Regarding the Flaxmere tragedy, earlier this week we were told:

"Foster said no other government agencies, such as Oranga Tamariki, were involved with the family before the incident."

Today the story changes:

"A 4-year-old boy critically injured in a suspected case of child abuse had previously been admitted to hospital with broken bones and removed from his immediate family...Oranga Tamariki intervened and the boy was placed into the care of wider family. He was returned to his immediate family shortly before Christmas."

I generally hold off critcising OT because of the 'damned if they do and damned if they don't' nature of their after-the-fact work.

But what the heck? Is this butt covering or sheer incompetence?

As for the "Not one more baby" politicised movement screaming about the uplift of Maori babies, it is glaringly obvious to who and where they should be directing that message. And it's not OT.

Labour's weird welfare world

A few weeks back I posted about burgeoning and  massively expensive motel residence funded by Work and Income.

Just advised from MSD:

We help people pay for emergency housing, such as motels, with an emergency housing grant. This is called an Emergency Housing Special Needs Grant.What’s changing on 30 March

From 30 March 2020, if you've been in emergency housing for more than 7 nights, we'll ask you to pay 25% of your income towards your housing costs.
This is similar to what people pay when they live in transitional housing or public housing.
We want to make housing costs as consistent and fair as possible for all our clients, no matter what type of housing you're in.

I was taken aback that those being temporarily put up in motels weren't being charged anything!

No wonder both individuals and moteliers were lining up.

Truth is rare

This evening, a gathering for a karakia for the nameless beaten Flaxmere four-year-old delivers an honest observation:

Hastings District Councillor Henare O'Keefe said good parenting began and ended in the home.
"If there is a solution, it cannot be legislated. If there is a solution you won't find it in Wellington. If there is a solution, you won't find it in council … we need to take a look in the mirror."

That is a demonstration of mana.

IRD's new approach: "This is Us"

Much has been mentioned by media lately regarding student debt. There's another kind of debt that hits the young too. Child support debt.The reasons for pursuing the debt are legitimate but penalties are outrageous.

I watched a video presentation from an IRD guy talking about efforts to reduce non-compliance among first time liable parents.

Here's a slide:

-New liable parents have a median age of 25.

-They have a relatively low income - median of $19k per year.

-Only a quarter of these pay their first three obligations on time

-Two thirds have over a 75% chance of getting into debt and remaining in debt.

1,000 new customers enter the system each month.


So how is IRD going to improve the situation?  Rethink their penalty regime?

No. They have pioneered a new form of customer engagement calling it, "This is Us"

"To truly have our customers at the "heart" of our every interaction...."

"...one of the things in a behavioural interventions area is that we had a behavioural psychologist on our team and we used a variety of different things like soft skills training, empathy, active listening skills, things like using appeals, like, "Oh, by the way, I'm sure you want to do the right thing for your children", this sort of type of conversation, we reframe the conversations to make it easier to understand, use some negotiation techniques and the bottom one is really important because we emphasised the importance of paying Child Support for the benefit of his or her child, which we wanted to resonate that you're not just doing this because we're telling you to do this, you're doing this because you have an obligation to support your children even though you're not living with them."

Patronising pap.  There are irresponsible absconders (who Labour are going to help out later this year by allowing them to go unnamed and non-liable) but also many fathers who would very much like to be living with their children but have been denied the opportunity thanks in part to the benefit system and court bias.

Anyway, they piloted the new approach on 248 new liable parents and formed two other control groups from the remainder:

All new liable parents assessed on June 2017
• 248 new liable parents from the pilot group
• 511 from the control group 1 = applications
received over the phone /in writing and educated
(called “Registration Initiative”)
• 311 from the control group 2 = all other
remaining customers and educated (called
“Standard Group”)
Pilot ran from July through December 2017

After 12 months the percentage of customers paying 'full and on time' was 62.6% for the pilot group; 61.6 for the registration initiative group and 61.2 for the standard group. The result wasn't cost effective on that measure. It wasn't provided at 17 months.

The measure of 'percent of assessment paid' is provided at 17 months.

These results have been sufficient to implement the new approach in the Families Section from July 2019.

They're all heart.

Changing our approach to teen parents?

By chance I happened upon a Teenage Parent Evidence Brief produced for Oranga Tamariki (OT) and published last August.

It is well known now that the teenage birthrate has been plummeting since 2008. This trend is happening across English-speaking countries. Oddly the paper rails against 'stigmatising' teen birth and recommends that adults 'normalise adolescent sex, contraception, and parenting'. I don't know why we should change the current approach which includes...

1/ financial support through the Young Parent Payment which the paper describes as:

obligations to participate in the service and in formal study
financial incentives
sanctions for failing to meet obligations
access to childcare payments.

It also involves money management - a payment card for necessity purchases with minimal cash provided.

2/ teen parent units in secondary schools

3/ and good access to effective contraception

...when the rate is falling so fast.

And for those who will immediately (and understandably) ask what's happening to the teen abortion rate...

My only real point of interest in the brief was a couple of graphs on p15 which show teen parents with an OT 'statutory' or 'report of concern' history are also in decline, just not as rapidly. Unsurprising.

Prison population stalled

Statistics NZ last week reported that 'Prison building intentions triple in 2019'. Is that reflective of a rise in the prison population? The December prison stats were released yesterday and it would appear not.

The prison population declined during 2018 and was steady during 2019. The December number is always lower. The ethnic make up has remained almost exactly the same:

40 percent of prisoners have 'violence' listed as their worst offence.

In December 2017 Andrew Little said he would reduce the prison population. I agree with his aim.

Too many people with mental health problems and other issues weren't getting the help they needed while in prison, Little said, and so were unable to meet the conditions they had to[to] get parole...Speaking to Three's The Nation Andrew Little said he was going to approach the issue "very sensibly"."It's actually not that hard if we choose to resource it properly."

 So I hope that at least some of those new buildings will be mental health facilities.

Unfashionable to expect much from husbands

A husband making a fleeting appearance at the very end of this story took me by surprise.

Latest unemployment rates

The December unemployment rate is down from 4.1 to 4 percent. But there underlying trends seen when graphed out ie the European and Maori rates have increased for the past two quarters while Pacific and Asian rates have been declining.

Source
(MELAA = Middle-eastern, Latin American, African)

In respect of the OECD New Zealand is in 14th lowest place:

(left click on images to enlarge)

Police on bikes take note

As police are about to take to bikes....

...I recommend the following tutorial:

"...employers are freezing the over 50s out of the job market"

A Stuff headline reads:

How employers are freezing the over 50s out of the job market

The single and over-45 population is more likely to suffer poverty than any group other than single parents and the situation is worse if you're female, Māori or Pasifika. As Kiwis are less and less financially prepared for retirement there is an older generation desperate to work - but nobody will hire them.... Caroline Nola is one of dozens Stuff spoke to this week, after we sought stories from older people struggling to find work. 

The article provides lots of stats but none that support the headline. They missed these:

50-54 year-olds have the second highest rate employment.

55-59 year-olds have a reducing employment rate but the lowest unemployment rate.

60-64 year-olds have a similar employment rate to 20-24 year-olds (71.5 versus 72.1%)

Susan St John makes an appearance saying:

There was evidence that more seniors were accessing benefits and food grants, and the welfare system did nothing to help, she said. 

Yes there is evidence. But the increase in Jobseeker benefit is much higher among 25-39 year-olds:

I feel very sorry for anyone who attends multiple interviews and gets nowhere. It's demoralising and depressing. But that scenario isn't confined to older applicants.

Food grants 39% higher than at peak of GFC

In the financial year ending 2019, food grants exceeded the number granted during the GFC - when unemployment reached 6.7% - by 38.6 percent.

In the December 2019 quarter alone, over 3,300 grants were made daily.

But I notice (as remarked on recently) that the biggest increase is not identified as occurring in town and city service centres but in an 'other' region. According to MSD:

"The ‘other’ region includes the Ministry Contact Centres and Centralised Services that do not cover a part of New Zealand. Hardship assistance is reported by the Service Centre which granted the payment, so the increase in ‘other’ indicates more of these being granted in centralised offices."

So the majority of the increase isn't from grants made face-to-face at service centres but applied for on-line (using MyMSD) or over the phone. I gather money is loaded onto a payment card and the average grant is around $100.

Data source

It's a worry for the taxpayer but it's a bigger worry for the person becoming increasingly dependent on these grants.

Update: Jim Rose asked, "Have you asked for info on rates at which applications were declined?" Not me but someone else did. I've charted the data for the last four financial years.

Source

Nash goes on the offensive but gets it wrong

Minister Stuart Nash does a weekly session with National MP, Mark Mitchell, on the Mike Hosking NewstalkZB show.

This morning, before Hosking had even asked an opening question Nash waded in:

NASH: "Hey Mike I haven't heard you comment on the December figures last year when 19,000  handed in their benefit and got back to work. Was that in one of your commentaries?"

HOSKING: "It was actually Stuart. You shouldn't come on this programme and say 'I haven't heard you' because all that indicates is you're tuned into the wrong radio station. You need to be where the number one radio show is and the audience is Stuart especially now that it's election year and you need some votes.

NASH: "Well when you think there are 19,000 more people in work than were on the benefit in the last quarter that's pretty good news . That shows a great economy and good economic management I would say. Wouldn't you Mike?"

HOSKING: "Well no because my great concern is the massive increase in the people on the benefit. How do you explain that?"

NASH: "It's still a lower percentage than it was when we took over [wrong - see below]."

HOSKING: "But it's still increasing though. There are more an more people on the Jobseeker benefit - there's another 15,000 on the Jobseeker benefit and these are work-ready people. Why aren't they working?"

NASH: "But the economy's growing, we've got record low unemployment. This is the third lowest unemployment in the last ten years.Wages are rising and the economy is booming."

More at Jan 29, 8:00 from 7.36

18,818 benefit cancellations for work is not particularly spectacular when compared to the previous  December quarters and the trend-line is down.

source

More importantly there were 55,341 main benefit grants in the Dec 2019 quarter - the highest number since Dec 2015.

As well, in December 2017 - just after Labour took over - 9.8% of the working age population was on a benefit. By December 2019 it had grown to 10.5%. 

In respect of the Jobseeker benefit the number grew from 4.2% to 4.9%

An election campaign that is facts-based? Honest, robust, transparent?

P and poverty

Started the day by reading this headline:

Kids in poverty miss start of school year, as siblings share one uniform

This continuing poverty problem is baffling. OK. High rents is a undeniable issue. But then we have children apparently living in tents and garages. That's a terrible environment for kids but no rent problem. Still no money though? And state houses are affordable, but still no money? With all the extra emergency assistance WINZ is handing out? Food and clothing has never been more accessible. Food banks, markets, recycled clothing stores, charity shops. 

Then I spent 40 mins watching Fighting the Demon. If you can get past the overly dramatic treatment of the subject I recommend it.

Apparently meth is ravaging poor small towns. Police identified 600 P users in Kawerau (out of a population of 6,000). The kids are going without food. Debt is rife. Up to Whangarei, with the highest Jobseeker rate in NZ and an addiction counselor says the business man is using meth to be more 'productive' but the beneficiary is using it to escape his existence.

Therein lies a couple of clues.

But the media never puts the two issues together.

Case manager feeling "...just like an ATM machine"

Most of us have little choice but to rely on statistics to build a picture of what is happening at Work and Income. Accordingly, anecdotal evidence has some value, especially when it is from the normally gagged front line, and despite being secondhand. I can only trust that it is genuine. Transcribed from NewstalkZB's Week on Demand  (Jan 27, 8.30 am segment, starts at 7.15) it begins with Mike Yardley reading out a text or email from a listener and then refers to an Official Information Request of mine (I believe):

"Good morning Mike, My partner works for Work and Income and she says there has definitely been a culture change with respect to client obligations and the whole benefit system has ground to a halt hence why you are seeing the massive rises in the Jobseeker/Work-Ready benefit numbers. My partner says that if you are on a  benefit now you can basically stay there indefinitely because Work and Income case mangers are not tuning you up. My partner says that she feels her job is now just like an ATM paying out money willy-nilly. There is not the case management there used to be," says Dave.

Mike continues,

"Which is an interesting point because I know there was an Official Information request on this very matter in the last few weeks and apparently, according to Work and Income they are now only spending - these are case managers - about 20% of their time helping people on a benefit into work or ensuring they are work-ready or doing some training, looking at other options...just generally trying to get them onto a more independent and productive footing. And apparently this collapse in how much time they are spending with that sort of work-focused case management is because they are doling out so many hardship assistance grants and having to wade through so many applications. I think the figures out on Thursday from MSD say there were 537,000 [573,000] hardship assistance grants given out in the last year."

Mike Yardley has also penned an opinion piece,  Benefit numbers betray Labour's posturing on well-being.

Why are 56,000 Maori claiming Jobseeker benefit when only 27,000 are unemployed?

Jacinda Ardern went to Ratana and told Maori she was working for their collective people and that the unemployment rate was dropping. Officially the latter is true.

But that's only half of the story.

Here is the Maori unemployment rate from Statistics NZ data:




However, in September 2017 Maori overtook NZ European on the Jobseeker numbers for the first time ever. Since they have been pulling away. Here are the Jobseeker numbers from MSD data:

It seems odd that the two trajectories are going in different directions.

According to the Stats NZ data at September 2019 there were 60,200 unemployed NZ Europeans and 27,500 unemployed Maori.

You would expect the number of  unemployed to be slightly higher than on Jobseeker - some people will be neither inclined to seek nor qualify for a Jobseeker benefit. This is the case for NZ Europeans.

But there is a large mismatch between 27,500 Maori unemployed and over 56,581 on Jobseeker benefit.

From Sep 17 to Sep 19 the Maori Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) fell from 70.4 to 67.8 percent - a drop of 2.6 points. NZ European LFPR fell from 71.7 to 70.7 - a drop of 0.3 points.

Looking at the 'not in the labour force' numbers, for NZ European they have climbed 9,000 - a 1.1% increase. The Maori increase is 17,800 - a massive 12 percent increase.

If an individual drops out of the labour force that means they are not looking or available for work. In which case they shouldn't be receiving a Jobseeker benefit. If they have dropped out due to health/disability reasons that preclude them from work permanently, they would go on the Supported Living Payment but there is no particular increase for Maori there.

On the other hand the Maori working age population has grown much more than the NZ European population probably due to the ageing NZ European pop versus the young Maori pop. (The stats are muddied by Stats NZ classifying the working age population as 15-64. Ridiculous when you can't even leave school till 16.)

But the same demographic characteristics apply to the Pacific population and their unemployment/ Jobseeker ratio is more like the NZ European with 13,400 unemployed and 11,552 on the Jobseeker benefit.

If Jacinda thinks this is a success for Maori she is probably in a very small minority.

And as she has pledged to run an election campaign free from fake news perhaps she could start by answering the question in the title of my post.

(There is one other remote possible explanation. Around 62,000 Jobseekers have a health condition or disability and are not 'work ready'. Could they all be Maori? I am going to rule it out on the basis that when the sickness benefit was rolled into the Jobseeker benefit in 2013 Maori only made up 28 percent or around 16,600 individuals. But I will OIA it.)

Update: A commentor points to part-time employment as a reason for many more Maori than just the 'unemployed' being on a Jobseeker benefit. But the 'underutilisation' (which includes underemployment) percentage for Maori is not much higher than for Pacific - 17.6 versus 14.1 percent. So I am skeptical about that answer.

Update 2: Further reflection - it is possible that the ranks of part-time Maori workers have been swollen by ex DPB ageing single parents. But that brings us back to arguing over whether these ladies are genuinely single. If they were partnered (as they very well may have been when claiming the DPB) they shouldn't qualify for the Jobseeker benefit (unless both partners are claiming the single rate - exactly half of the married/de facto rate). So many complications.

Bottom-line is the Maori unemployment/Jobseeker ratio is utterly different from the NZ European and Pacific. And I'd like to understand why.

Will Maori overtake NZ European in Labour's term?

If they do, it'll be a historic first.

Data source

Terrible start to a "factual campaign free from misinformation"

This is quite desperate stuff. The number of people on Jobseeker benefits has gone up 10 percent since December 2018. Here's Sepuloni's take:

The December quarter benefit numbers released today show the Government’s plan to get people off the benefit and into work is starting to pay off,” Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni said.
“Nearly 19,000 people cancelled their benefit and went into work in the last few months of the year – that’s about the population of Levin – and is the second quarter in a row that the number of people coming off the benefit and into work has increased, year on year.

When a net figure goes up the only reason is that there have been more grants than cancellations.

“The number of people on a main benefit is 314,408, which is 10.5 per cent of the working age population, remaining lower than the 11.2 per cent on a main benefit under National five years ago.

In December 2014 the unemployment rate was 5.5 percent - not 4.2%. This is feeble stuff.

The picture is bad and she really cannot explain it away.

“The Government is committed to helping people to find meaningful and sustainable work while ensuring the welfare system is fairer and more accessible for all New Zealanders. While there’s more to do, we are on the right track,” Carmel Sepuloni said.

Unbelievable. I'd don't want to see what the 'wrong' track looks like.

And right now Jacinda Ardern is in Martinborough telling her MPs she wants a "factual election campaign free from misinformation".

Update: Getting worse. Sepuloni told Magic Talk midday news,"The trajectory for the rise started before we got in."

It did not.

'Hand-out' prioritised over 'hand-up'

Trite as they may sometimes sound there is a good deal of wisdom in ancient proverbs:

Give a Man a Fish, and You Feed Him for a Day. Teach a Man To Fish, and You Feed Him for a Lifetime

The following is a quote from the latest MSD Annual Report:

The increase in demand for financial assistance this year has impacted on the time our case managers can spend with clients on proactive employment-focused case management: only 20 percent of engagements with clients in June 2019 had an employment focus, the lowest proportion since 2014.

A significant element in extra financial assistance is Food Grants.

A 72% increase in 2 years.

Regionally, most of the food grant increase is classified as 'other' so one can only assume the applicant has no fixed address. The objection is commonly made that you can't get someone into a job if they have no fixed address. Yet MSD matches thousands of temporary visitors to jobs every year.

Ardern's government has prioritised a hand-out over a hand-up and the 'need' only grows.

Fairness or Freedom?

The Daily Blog links to a column published in the Guardian by Bryce Edwards. It begins:

If New Zealand had a giant monument at the entrance to Auckland or Wellington harbour it would be a “Statue of Equality” not liberty, or so said visiting American political scientist Leslie Lipson who wrote a book about our politics in the 1940s.
New Zealanders have long held dear the notion of fairness, and Lipson’s reflection remains true today. 

And concludes:

 ...if Labour and its coalition partners can keep public debate around traditional egalitarian concerns about inequality, housing, health and education, the New Zealand notion of fairness will probably also ensure her government will get another chance.

Intrigued I had a look at the Lipson book. Some further context:

'Fairness' is of course a highly subjective notion. One man's fairness is the next man's injustice. That's why politicians should not be trusted to deal in it.

Freedom on the other hand restricts the use of force by politicians to impose their particular brand of 'fairness'. I know which I rate more highly.

Dodgy stats

This table is taken from the statistical snapshot that informs the Children's Commissioner widely reported comments about inequity between the Oranga Tamariki's treatment of Maori and non Maori babies pre and post-birth:

Notice that the number of 'Ethinicity [sic] not specified' has climbed significantly since 2004 when they numbered just 3 - or 1.6% of all reports. Last year they numbered 336 - or 21.8% of all reports.

Now, the more babies that are removed from the non-Maori group the greater the gap grows between Maori and non-Maori.

Look at it this way. In 2004 Maori reports made up 53 percent of the total. And in 2019 Maori reports made up ... 53 percent of the total.

I don't think any conclusive claim can be made about Maori versus non-Maori with such a significant non-specified group. For instance, "There were eight times more concerns reported for unborn Māori babies in 2019, as compared with 2004. In that same time, reported concerns for non-Māori increased only 4.5 times."

And it leaves a question mark over the rest of the data pertaining to 0-3 month olds.

Is the removal of Maori babies "racism and bias"?

According to RNZ:

"Māori babies were five times more likely to end up in state care than non-Māori last year and their rate of urgent entries into state care has doubled since 2010, official figures show.

In that same period, 61 Māori babies were ordered into state care before they were born, compared to just 21 non-Māori.

Children's Commissioner Judge Andrew Becroft released the statistics this morning as part of a widescale inquiry into the removal of Māori babies, aged up to three months old, by the state.

That age group had been selected because that was where the statistics showed there were problems, and because it was a crucial bonding time for mother and child.

Judge Becroft said the figures raised clear questions about racism and bias within the state care sector.

"I've said previously that it's impossible to factor out the enduring legacy of colonisation... or modern day systemic bias," he said.

"Now that, to some extent, will obviously be at play here as it is across all decision-making and all government departments."

The inequities for Māori had grown over time and continued to worsen, Judge Becroft said."

 Is it not also possible that the high degree of risk-aversion rife through the public service is playing a role? After all the  rate of child abuse and neglect deaths has also been much higher among Maori children.

Previously I have posted the official stats as published by the Family Violence Death Review Committee. The most recent:

If the risk is greater based on factual evidence, and authorities act on that known risk, is that "racism and bias"?

But I also have sympathy for those who are decrying the high rate of removal. Personally nothing riles me more than laws, regulations and processes designed to tackle a small minority of offenders being over-zealously or even universally applied.