Youth crime blamed on poverty

About West Auckland apparently:

Family structures are being broken under economic pressures and the facilities are not there to stop children from falling into a cycle of violence and poverty.

Family structures are not even formed in many cases, let alone broken. If a society is prepared to reward the worst impulses and absence of positive values in people, it can hardly be surprised at the result.


I was asked to speak on Leighton Smith's show last Thursday about youth crime in general (sparked of course by the latest West Auckland incident) and what I thought was contributing and if we could turn the ship around.

I talked about how violent incidents tend to stay within dysfunctional families. In this instance it has spilled over. But the dysfunction has been there for decades. The dysfunction that comes from making children a source of income and allowing them to be held hostage to their parents lifestyles.

I talked about the fact that young men  in prison are much more likely to be fathers. Criminals have more children.

Can we turn it around? We will always have criminality but yes we can reduce the number of children who are being born to parents with no financial or emotional ability to raise them. At least the current government has identified young people as their focus and are making greater demands on them in return for support and that is showing some positive results (albeit the results may be simply correlated.)

But there is no point in treating the whole population to cure a problem that rests in a small minority. We do not need to monitor every child and we certainly don't need to pour more money into every home with young children.

(I have probably mentioned this brief paper previously but the links between crime and welfare have been researched and proven. Worth a read:

" There are many factors contributing to the rise in juvenile violence and crime, from the glorification of violence in the media to the failure of the “war on drugs.” But, today, I would like to focus on a factor that has received far less attention — the relationship between the welfare state and crime." )

Red Alert - not so alert

Blogs reflect the level of interest, enthusiasm and commitment the blogger/s feel.

Labour's MP blog, Red Alert, used to be a very active place.

In election year an upsurge in activity would be expected.

Since the election date was announced on March 10, there have been 4 posts.

In April there were 0 posts compared to 18 in April 2013 and 49 in April 2012.

And I don't accept that MPs are simply too busy campaigning to contribute. Social media is a hugely important part of the campaign.

So what do you take from this?

Does Labour look like a party remotely interested in winning an election?

Instinct and babies

"I brought a baby into the world but I still had no idea how to raise her, how to change her, how to feed her properly....I had no idea at the time Del-C was born that when she cried it meant she was wet or hungry."

I read this out to my 15 year-old daughter and asked,  Would you know why a baby was crying? Well, yes, she answered. Usually if someone cries there's something wrong so you try to figure out what it is.

What is that? Commonsense? Or instinct? I thought a mother's response to her baby crying was instinctive. Does everything have to be spelt out?

She then said, When I'm older I should get a job inventing lame, pathetic excuses for people. I'd be really good at it. Better than that anyway.

Foster mother writes book about her dealings with CYF

Sean Plunket interviewed author Karen Scott this morning. RadioNZ has done likewise:
 

Child, Youth and Family's (CYF) fostering system is failing the children it is meant to be protecting, a foster mother has told Nine to Noon.
Karen Scott said she and her husband took in a five-year-old boy who had been removed from his father's care, and told Nine to Noon why after two years she felt she had no choice but to ask CYF to take him back.

She clearly loved this child but he had psychological problems (culminating?) in killing a family cat. That is not reported in the article on Radio NZ and I have not listened to their interview. But the woman seemed genuine, quite heartbroken in having to relinquish the child, and wracked with guilt about whether her actions had affected her own and husband's children.

When describing her experience with CYF she was not damning of individuals, just the system and processes they had to work with. Resolving small matters could take inordinate time (when the boy needed a haircut CYF were worried about cultural sensitivity). But important stuff, like trying to get professional help for the child, seemed impossible.

Sean said that there were times when reading the book he wasn't sure about his own response and that it is a hard read. But he applauded her bravery in writing the book.

(I note RadioNZ does not name the book which is called Another Mother's Love)

In 2011 Karen Scott and Mark Finlay and their six children opened their home and hearts to a sad, skinny five-year-old boy who was placed with them by New Zealand's Child, Youth and Family services. James arrived with nothing other than the clothes he was wearing, supposedly for just a short-term stay. But what followed were two turbulent years as Karen and Mark attempted to parent a very troubled young boy.
Another Mother's Love is a heart-wrenching account of a mother's attempt to nurture her foster child with unconditional love and kindness. However, is love enough? Karen and Mark faced a harrowing decision – to give up James or risk their family's future.

Listening I formed a mental picture of CYF putting a troubled child with new foster parents and hoping like hell that the new family and environment would work...multiplied across many, many more families.

Top heavy populations

NCPA reports about Social Security for retirees:

As baby boomers transition into retirement, the system will see serious strains. Within 15 years, the number of Americans reaching retirement age will increase by a staggering 70 percent, while the number of Americans of working age will increase by just 6 percent.

• In 1935, when the program started, 17 workers paid for the benefits of one retiree. By 2035, estimates indicate that just two workers will be paying for the benefits of a single retiree.
• The program is expected to run out of funds by 2038.

And this is the US, a country that shares fertility rates at or above replacement with NZ, reasonably rare amongst English-speaking countries. Many European and Asian nations are in more precarious positions.

Heads you lose, tails you lose

The Guardian reports on the predicted increase in domestic violence during the football World Cup:

The most detailed research into the links between the football World Cup and domestic abuse rates has revealed that in one force area in England and Wales, violent incidents increased by 38% when England lost – but also rose by 26% when they won.

The after match violence is predominantly male-perpetrated but not solely:

In the past few weeks, officers have drawn up a list of 117 high-risk and high-frequency perpetrators – 110 men and seven women – using intelligence drawn from domestic abuse data, risk assessments and football violence data.
The individuals will be visited at home by officers and warned not to vent their feelings on their partners. Essex police are also running a high-profile social media and advertising campaign – informed by interviews with victims of domestic abuse – to raise awareness of the crime's prevalence, highlight that victims can be male, female, gay or straight, and call on the public to stand together to fight it.

I recall attending a game at Old Trafford in the late 1980s and marvelling at the highly effective use of mounted horses to back into groups and disperse violent scuffles. Not much use in a small terrace house though.

The Scotsman: A "monstrous invasion of family life"

Extremism in Scotland.

Could it happen here?  Quite possibly. Never under-estimate the state's inclination to summon and impose seemingly easy solutions to difficult problems. Legislators have to justify their salaries.

OPPONENTS of controversial plans to introduce a “state guardian” for every child in Scotland will step up their campaign with a major conference next week.
MSPs, academics, social work experts and medics will gather in Edinburgh prior to a £30,000 court battle aimed at derailing the Scottish Government proposals.
Holyrood passed legislation this year which will mean every child in Scotland is given a designated “named person” – usually a health visitor or teacher – who will be a point of contact for families, but also monitor the child’s welfare and development.
The government insists that mothers and fathers are still, in most cases, the best people to raise their children and the new scheme will not change this when it is rolled out in August 2016.
However, many groups see the move as an intrusion into the traditional role of the family and say the Scottish Government has gone “too far”.
One described it as a “monstrous invasion of family life”.

The convenience of cannabis contradiction

While leader of the Mana Party is steadfastly opposed to tobacco and cannabis...

RACHEL Decriminalise marijuana you would oppose that.

HONE: That’s a personal position I've taken, it's not a position that Mana's taken, but it's a personal position I've taken. And I take it because I'm not one of those like liberals for whom that sort of thing is cool. I see how marijuana leads to dead eyes in some of the kids that we have to teach. I see how it leads to dead eyes in the families that I've gotta go and talk to because my wife who's a Principal makes me go and see some of these families. I see the problems, and so when people talk about decriminalisation at that level, I think to myself it's not actually one of the major priorities in my life.

...leader of the Internet Party, Laila Harre has announced that her preference is for decriminalisation.

That works well for them. They can individually promise to keep voters with a strong preference either way satisfied.  At least on intent. They can have their on-line policy debate and both sides win!

Upshot? No loss of votes for the Internet/Mana alliance. Quite probably some gain from previous NZALCP and Green voters.

Ah, the vagaries of political pragmatism.

The living wage effect and EMTRs

Two parking wardens who will receive $4 an hour extra under the Wellington City Council's adoption of a living wage each have a partner and a 4 month-old baby. Both say that they will be able to reduce their work hours due to the increase, and spend more time with their families. One from 75 hours down to 40 and the other from 50 down to 40.

That sounds nice. Though some might think, wouldn't you take the opportunity to earn the extra money with a young family to support?

Except there may not be any extra money. Both of these men will be receiving WFF and possibly an accommodation supplement. At the higher pay rate, if they work longer hours they may lose their other subsidies. In fact, they may be working for nothing. That doesn't make any sense.

What these two men may be is a prime example of is how high effective marginal tax rates reduce work effort.

But it also shows that their original wage (combined with state subsidies) was a livable =  living income.

Some of the support for the living wage was based on the assumption that government wouldn't have to subsidise workers to the extent they do now. In fact Bill English said:

The analysis shows that the “living wage” would least help low-income families whose welfare support would abate as their income rose. In those cases, the main beneficiary of the living wage would effectively be the Government because it would receive more in tax and pay out less through abated transfers.

Who picked that these struggling low wage families would simply reduce their hours?

On the upside, at least they are parking wardens.

Frank Macskasy responds

Frank Macskasy responds to my letter.

Couple of points Frank. I don't agree with corporate welfare but subsidies to the film industry and Rio Tinto don't reduce what is available for spending on the poor. They protect government revenue and jobs.

You complain about tax cuts, which "include Working for Families". WFF featured more than one increase to Family Support (now FTC) aimed at children of beneficiaries. In real terms FTC is now worth considerably more than in the early 1990s.

The fact that I disagree with your strategy for lifting the poor doesn't mean I disagree with the goal.

Support for the Greens carbon tax surprises

The Taxpayer's Union has come out in support of a carbon tax that is revenue neutral. On balance they find it preferable to the Emissions Trading Scheme.

I wonder why we need either.

The only answer (for believers in anthropogenic global warming) is that NZ can make a difference by once again leading the world; that we can and must save the planet; that the price we pay will be worth it when we write our country's name into the history books.  It's seductive for some.

And an unrealistic romantic notion for others.

NZ didn't lead the world when it introduced the Old Age Pension. And it barely led the world when giving women the vote (as a very young country NZ didn't face the inertia inherent in long-established parliamentary institutions but the suffragette activity was rife elsewhere). The 1938 Social Security Act happened around the same time as the Beveridge reforms in the UK and was pre-dated by the US Social Security Act of 1935. Recognition for Maori inclusion in mainstream legislative entitlements - and later, new benefits driven partially by Maori activism - occurred while awareness of civil rights grew in the US. Etc.

There is contagion between continents. Social, economic and now environmental issues beset and bother the developed world at pretty much the same time. They did a hundred years ago even without the immediacy of communication.

So kidding ourselves that Kiwis are going to once more set a precedent that cannot conscionably be ignored by countries emitting mega-multiplied emissions, is just pie in the sky.

More welfare changes on the way

The government has announced a rewrite of the Social Security 1964 Act, which is a massive maze of dated legislation.

I note that the cabinet minutes say:

- a rewrite of the Act would mean all aspects of the benefit system, including recent reforms, would be open for debate through the parliamentary process

- the rewrite [would] include consideration of policy change....[including] providing support for redirection of benefit payments and use of payment cards

An extension of 'income management' currently utilised for young beneficiaries was always on the cards. But there are other specific areas for reform including the way in which incomes are assessed against benefits.

There seems to be concern that the level of public interest will be high and that some of the proposals may contravene the Human Rights Act or the NZBOR. My reading of  this is a desire to provide more targeted assistance (or, indeed, method of support) over universal and that could raise issues of discrimination. But I am open to correction.

Proposals for policy changes are invited from the Minister to the Cabinet Social Policy Committee by the end of this year, with the new legislation introduced by December 2015.

Despite the press release claiming, "This work can’t be rushed," this is National pushing change along very quickly - par for the course over the first two terms.

Now all they need to do is get re-elected.

(After-thought. This presents ACT with a great opportunity to get some serious welfare reforms on the table.)

I only date boys...

Keeping Stock blogs about this example of Green merchandising:

Which got me imagining other party stickers:


Mana - I only date boys my Dad let's me

NZ First - I only date boys with hair like Winston Peters and their own Zimmer frame

Conservative - I only date boys sporting a chastity pledge

NZALCP - I only date boys with bongs

National - I only date boys with big bank accounts

ACT - I only date boys who know how may angels can dance on a pinhead

Labour - I only date boys


I'm sure you can do better.

Karl du Fresne on Big Government

 Writing in today's DomPost:

Big Government is now so all-pervasive that many people find it hard to imagine life without it.
That was evident from a recent minor party leaders' debate on TV3's The Nation, in which ACT leader Jamie Whyte was treated as some sort of freak or traitor for daring to suggest that New Zealanders don't need constant intervention from the state in every aspect of their lives. This is clearly a dangerous heresy.
Only days later, Whyte got a similar going-over from Guyon Espiner on Report. It seems we've all become so accustomed to the smothering influence of Big Government – even to the extent of deciding whether to have children – that we can't comprehend any alternative.
Whyte, of course, believes the state should get out of our lives, save for a few essential functions.
It's an idea worth exploring, but you get the impression that for a lot of people, it's just too scary.

Why Internet/Mana should be taken seriously

Internet/Mana's first big policy is free tertiary education.

The government already spends annually around $4 billion on tertiary education. But student loans to pay fees total just over a further $1 billion. It would be possible to fund 'free' tertiary education by pushing out the Super qualifying age.

What the Internet/Mana Party are going to do is set up an inter-generational fight. They will harness the feeling amongst the young that the baby-boomers had it good thanks to the state (plenty of truth in that) whereas they have to take on debt and then work to pay it off, as well as working to support the growing demands of the Super bill.

It's a clever but extremely divisive strategy. It isn't inspiration that will get young people out voting. It's anger.

And as much as I loathe the idea of Dotcom buying influence and manipulating politics the candidates can mount a strong case and campaign for the youth vote.

UPDATE

Just heard it direct from Harre. She was asked what their policy on raising the Super age is and she said that they would be looking very closely at the "trade off" between generational spending. Radio Live, just before 2pm.

Azalea

Here's one just finished. Oil on canvas. Zali is  Reona's granddaughter. She was playing in our garden late summer - at times throwing about a rugby ball with my 20 year-old son. One portrait alone couldn't capture her various expressions. So I painted four views on one canvas. She is life-size in each. Goes without saying but she's gorgeous.

Which principles does Sue Bradford have that Laila Harre doesn't?

Just wondering....

They are both hard left unionists; 'social justice' radicals; ex-MPs; former paid Green staffers and feminists.

But something significant clearly separates them.

Let's start using the word 'controversy'

Here's a great letter spotted in this morning's DomPost:

 

Compliments and gratitude to both Rex Benson and Bill Aitchison for caring enough to put some facts before the public.

Expect a real ratcheting up of the 'child poverty' CONTROVERSY - yes, let's start calling it that given so many "media and activists" misuse the data to further their own agendas - with a new book due for release in mid-June, and an election in September.

CYF staff stretched, seriously

MSD has just released a 135 page CYF Workload and 
Caseload review.  

The following pretty much sums it up:

When staff were asked what needed to change to make things better for social

workers, the number one answer was ‘more staff’

.

“....we are working with people and children and all of our decisions affect their lives forever.

It would be good to be able to have the time

and capacity to think, analyse and reflect rather than acting in the moment...”

There are currently 753 Care and Protection social workers. Without a reduction in the number of assessments it is recommended another 356 are required. 

CYF workers have my sympathy.

Taxing our way into prosperity?

A letter I wrote was published in the DomPost this morning -  but only half of it.

This is the entire letter:

Dear Editor

Silvio Famularo (May 24) wrote that benefits should be lifted because then poor people can spend more, increasing demand for goods and services, and creating more jobs.

To increase benefit expenditure the government would have to increase taxation. That means taking more money off people will in turn have less to spend on the same goods and services. Perhaps Silvio intended more tax on the wealthy or companies. But that will result in less support for high value commodities, less profit and less investment. Ultimately, fewer jobs.

Winston Churchill said, "We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle".