3News » Home
Full Story

Backlash against 'mean-spirited' welfare changes

32 comments | Post Comment email Email printer friendly Print    Text Size:
aA
aA
aA
Phil Goff

Phil Goff

video
Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:15p.m.

By Jono Hutchison

Dole bludgers beware - Prime Minister John Key has unveiled the Government's plans to reform the welfare system in what he's calling a "kick in the pants" for some beneficiaries - but opponents say it's more like kicking people when they're down.

National has finally acted on its promise to get tough on beneficiaries to break what it calls the 'cycle of welfare dependency'.

"Too many people have become trapped in a life of welfare, existing from week-to-week on a minimal income," says Social Development Minister Paula Bennett.

The Government wants solo parents to work at least 15 hours a week once their youngest child is over six. Sickness beneficiaries will have to work part-time as well, if they're assessed as capable.

"You as the individual recipient also have an obligation to your fellow taxpayers to do everything you can to get a job," says Ms Bennett.

And for those who don't, benefits can be halved, suspended and then finally, cancelled.

Labour leader Phil Goff says that could end up hurting children.

"We can't have children growing up in this country hungry, ill-housed, ill-looked after because of the sins of their parents."

As part of the new plan, both unemployment and sickness beneficiaries will have to re-apply every year.

"When the times were their best, and the unemployment rate was at sort of 3.5 percent, we still had people on the unemployment benefit for more than four years," Ms Bennett told Campbell Live tonight. "So actually, the incentives need to be right."

One advocate for beneficiaries says most people already want to work, and the Government's plans won't help.

"They're mean-spirited and they're blaming people who need to rely on a benefit, and they're making it their fault that they need to rely on a benefit rather than helping them to move out of that benefit reliance," says Kay Brereton of the Beneficiary Advocacy Federation.

Beneficiaries 3 News spoke to had mixed reactions.

"I think one thing that people forget is when women stop and have babies for five or so years it's hard getting back," says Charlotte Thomas. "You lose your status, you feel different."

"I'd probably take the offer and go back to work," says Jacky Morgan.

The plans still have to make it through a select committee, and although the Maori Party has some reservations, the Government has ACT on its side, and most of the changes are expected to become law by October.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Comments [32]

ALL BUllLOCKS
28 Apr 2010 8:32p.m.

I bet you any thing that the vast majority of people on the benefit have genuine reasons. Why is everyone on the benefit been punished and discriminated against. A couple of rotten eggs in a dozen eggs doesn't make all the eggs rotten. I have never felt so discriminated against in all my life. Thanks National

Cb
01 Apr 2010 10:40p.m.

This national goverment has all its priorities wrong, they will fail as did the last national government.

Food banks and church groups will soon be in big demand as this spitefull government lashes out at the poor.

I hate the damned national party

cyril
26 Mar 2010 8:55p.m.

Strange to me it seems only those who are shirking will be penalised. If you qualify you wont have a problem. If you have to re-apply every so often and have to justify your entitalment is that not fair? Seems reasnable to me. Why should you be given a goverment cheque no questions asked for as long as you want. If you arnt prepared to spend a bit of time to justify your payments surely you dont deserve them.

K
25 Mar 2010 4:57p.m.

Why are they concentrating so much on dpb & sickness benefits, what about the dole (unemployment) they have no children or illnesses to worry about, should'nt the goverment be concentrating on employing these people first, there are thousands of single, healthy people collecting the dole each week & some for many years,, is'nt it just plain common sence to get these capable unemployed into full time work before starting on the rest & then the widowerswith no dependants & so forth.
Surely i am not the only one who feels this way,after all it is just simple common sence & obviously that our goverment does not have, after all there are not enough jobs for all, perhaps bringing the retirement age down to 5yrs & giving them the option to retire or to train someone young for alittle extra for the 5yrs instead, then by the time that person retires,they would have trained someone else for the position, just a thought.......

K
25 Mar 2010 3:26p.m.

Why are they concentrating so much on the dpb & the sickness benefits, what about the dole (unemployment benefit) they have no children or illnesses to worry about, should'nt the goverment be concentrating on employing these people first, there are thousands of single, healthy people collecting the dole each week & some for many years, is'nt it just plain common sence to get these capable unemployed into full time work before stating on the rest & then the widowers with no dependants & so forth.
Surely i am not the only one who feels this way, after all it is just simple common sence, that obviously our goverment does not have, after all there are not enough jobs for all, prehaps bringing the retirement age down by 5 yrs & giving them the option to retire or train a young person for a little extra for the 5 yrs instead, then by the time that person retires they would have trained someone else to take over there position, one job down etc

Dave
25 Mar 2010 5:55a.m.

Yes lets not forget that many people on the sickness and invalids benefits are there because of things that have happened to them.

Child abuse victims who have lost the use of their bodies, whether they were abused by their parents or state caregivers.

Left with broken bodies, sometimes as a result of government inaction on child welfare policy.

ACC recipients who have been moved from ACC onto a state benefit who have no chance of recovering from their accidents (170 of those this year alone).

People who have inherited genetic disorders or illnesses.

And lets not forget that these people have feelings and are human as well.
Human however to a very small degree according to NZ law

Beneficiaries have little to no rights under the New Zealand Bill of rights

They cant be married without losing their state pensions which means they cant contribute equally to any relationship that they are in

If they have a parent or partner then the caregiver is legally responsible for looking after them
Its a degrading process, being subjected to descrimination in such massive amounts

Paula Bennett believes New Zealanders will accept treating beneficiaries like animals, including the sick

If the Kahui twins or Nia Glassey had of survived, the invalids benefit is likely where they would have ended up

Punished for being abused children, told that they arent worth the same as a normal human beings, without the priviledges of independence and destined to answer to criminals like Paula Bennett and John Key who believe that when it comes to beneficiaries.. the New Zealand public will understand that the bill of rights should just be ignored.. again

How many freedoms and priviledges do you take for granted that these people have already lost

Government promised decades ago to get rid of illegal forms of descrimination such as this... but here we are decades later with the same garbage again

Lets not forget that the MOSD created some of these people

Survivor
24 Mar 2010 8:48p.m.

I think Paula Bennett is a grand example of a beneficiary turned Member of Parliament. I also think this is a great idea and we need to give her the benefit of doubt.

We are bringing seasonal workers from the Pacific Islands in order to pick the fruit crops. (Maybe we need to state by law that jobs be offered to New Zealanders first and if companies don't adhere to this law then some form of disciplinary action should be put in place). Just a thought.

If any one person refuses to turn up for the job interview or finds a way to sabotage the job then the benefit is automatically revoked.

I am sure The Ministry of Social Developement (MSD)are bouncing loads of ideas off the walls. What ever the outcome, this will have to apply to ALL beneficiaries targeted.

RESPONSE TO Alex
24 Mar 2010 8:18a.m.
Maybe MSD could employ people (5 or 6 per WINZ office) and these new employees be responsible for budgeting of persons benefit and allocating a certain amount of money to pay different bills or maybe there are families who should be paid with special WINZ grant vouchers instead of cash deposited into their accounts. Another thought.

I do know that Voucher do not cover alcohol or ciggies.

I am an invalid beneficiary with a life threatening illness but I still do a small amount of voluntary work when and where I can.

I am a genuinely unwell person and I on a yearly basis have to renew and prove my case. Looking at me is just not enough to continue the invalids benefit.

Yes I did work full time for 20 years, paid my taxes and I still wish I could work again. Sadly thats not the case.

Best wishes MSD

scrapheaped
24 Mar 2010 3:12p.m.

Paula Bennett's Department (MSD) is also responsible for EMPLOYMENT, but all she seems interested in doing is hitting beneficiaries.

What is her Department doing about creating new employment opportunities? There are far more job seekers than those who are registered unemployed.

Last year John Key described NZ as a plucky little country that would get through the recession by everyone pulling together, whereas Paula Bennett seems hellbent on exacerbating social divisions while not providing ANY new opportunities.

katrina
24 Mar 2010 2:18p.m.

JD & Pete I agree with you both, good ideas.
Sam I bet everybody knows someone like that.

Alex
24 Mar 2010 12:38p.m.

Pete: That's not a bad idea. Like you indicated, though, these children are less likely to go to school so you're still not certain they'll be fed. And I think we need to face the reality that the DPB isn't actually all that much, and that the buying booze and ciggies is just a stereotype. There are plenty of solo parents who only want the best for their children and do find work of their own accord to support their children as long as it doesn't clash with the time they need to spend with their children (you can't expect them to do night shift work because it's illegal to leave a child under 14 home alone). Job opportunities for solo parents are obviously limited.

Post a comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide here
Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:



3News Video 3News Audio