• Full Story

Labour's child policy a 'welfare trap' - Key

Email
Print

Tue, 08 Nov 2011 11:19a.m.

John Key

John Key

Labour's promise to extend the Working for Families tax credit to beneficiaries has been labelled a "welfare trap" by Prime Minister John Key.

The party's $2.6 billion policy to tackle child poverty includes giving beneficiary families an extra $80 a week.

That part of the policy will take six years to fully implement and cost $349 million a year by 2018.

Mr Key calls the plan a step in the wrong direction which will "trap people on welfare".

"I think the single biggest thing we can do [to tackle poverty] is actually try and get people off welfare and into work," he told Radio New Zealand.

He says Labour's policy is saying to a lot of people "You are going to be destined to a life of low income" if they did not come off welfare.

Mr Key again attacked Labour's figures, saying the party's taking "a rather schizophrenic approach" to its election pledge costings, which don't add up.

"Yesterday, they were out there saying OK, we're now going to spend what is a very, very expensive and large price tag for their children's policy.

"Everything we've ever seen from Labour is those schemes cost a hell of a lot more."

Labour leader Phil Goff on Tuesday defended the policy, which also includes extending paid parental leave from 14 to 26 weeks.

He told TVNZ's Breakfast programme Labour had worked out all the costs, and it was affordable because of the six-year phase-in period.

Mr Goff says National has its priorities wrong - giving tax cuts to the rich, instead of taking children out of poverty.

NZN

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

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

09 Nov 2011 02:54p.m.

LinuxRocks wrote:

@Hamish

Could not have said it better myself.
National are for corprate greed and allways have been.

09 Nov 2011 02:30p.m.

wondering wrote:

before we line up DPB mums and their kids, stamp their foreheads and put them in the razor wire fenced off ghetto ...... let us wonder what $70 more a week could do for a one parent family with say 2 kids , a small and a medium size kid..... an extra blanket on each bed, undies, a bra for mum, garden tools and seeds, home maintenance/ plumber/ paint/ hinges, telephone, bus trips, car, food variety/ nutrition, books, appliances fridge/ microwave/ radio/ TV, sanitary pads, medical emergency fund, dental care, decent 2nd hand furniture, school stationary... generally all the " luxuries" many take for granted by right of living in a developed nation. There are many families living with out these things and life can quickly spiral completely out of control, become so constantly stressful and depressing that it is impossible to lift yourself above it.

09 Nov 2011 01:02p.m.

Hamish wrote:

@Working woman: Some people definately abuse the DPB and this needs to be stopped. However unemployment/dpb benifits are the smaller part of the welfare system and only represent a small part of society, otherwise John the banker would not want to alienate them as voters.
You have focused on a red herring, something john the banker threw out there to distract you from the fact that he gave himself and his top earner mates massive tax breaks ($1000/week for john). How much did he give you? John made his millions by attacking the NZ economy and until recently had shares in the Bank of America and its underlings that profits from kiwi mortgagee's paying more because of interest rate rises. The man is no patriot. And this is the guy you are voting for?

09 Nov 2011 11:10a.m.

LinuxRocks wrote:

@Working Woman,

Good view on this, but some woman have been raped and had kids, and cant find the time to work. and I know for a fact that there are almost no jobs around, BUT... some people have faurded the benefit system so I can see where you are coming from. Maby more assments for people applying for the DPB? I vote Green.

08 Nov 2011 09:24p.m.

Working Woman wrote:

I'll be voting for John Key. I certainly won't be voting for more money to be handed out in benefits whilst hard working non-breeders (or those who consider carefully their choice to have children once they can afford them and are in a stable relationship) are penalised. I'll vote for a govenrment that rewards those who work hard and make smart financial and family choices.

08 Nov 2011 08:36p.m.

Me wrote:

@john They the reason he couldn't come through with so many promises is because labour had gotten us way into dept! the only reason it was looking prosperous is because labour lied!and we dont hate him!

08 Nov 2011 07:19p.m.

Sean wrote:

I have been a self-employed contractor for a few years now, i have to pay 25% withholding tax, 15% gst on my wages and 15% on what i buy, plus all the petrol taxes and other hidden taxes we pay. I have not had any work for months now thanks to the global position and poor management of our country, we have sent all our jobs to china and now have low priced crap in our stores, but no money to buy them. I only get $75/w after my rent is paid on a benefit, this is to pay for all my bills and food. I don't want to be on the benefit, i want to work, even start my own business, but how can i do that if i am kept in the underclass by John and his government. You think the government has good policies here, they don't, if i had a TV on HP i would get help with the repayments, but as i have a computer on HP that i use for job searching and doing what i can to get myself off a benefit i am penalized and get NO assistance for it. I payed more tax a week than i get on the benefit, why is that, its my money is it not? I agree with John (from 8 NOV 2011 1:45P.M.) I HATE mr key too he has made things better for the rich and made the divide greater between rich and poor, that is how National keeps people down and i would say even have more control on the people than any Labour policy, people on low income are around 135 worse off than a high income person, how does it help people to be kept in poverty? that is control Pete (08 NOV 2011 12:09P.M.) As for taking any job you can get, i would take anything i could get, but have not had even an interview since being on the benefit, Karin (08 NOV 2011 2:08P.M.) your comment is great IF we have a high amount of jobs for people to go for when they are in competition with 2000+ people for a basic supermarket position, how is anyone expected to get that job if they don't even get a look in. Jons 08 NOV 2011 4:06P.M. Business only survives from the income of the people paying for the items they sell. where will that come from? Low incomes

08 Nov 2011 06:35p.m.

M1 wrote:

Hamish the last Labour Government signed the contract for the BMW's. If you know of a way to break a legally valid contract without being held liable, then please enlighten us all with your wisdom. Backing out of the deal would have cost a lot, and then you'd be criticizing National for breaking contracts.

08 Nov 2011 06:20p.m.

Clarke wrote:

@Pete I think you are a little confused as to the concept of socialism as its about helping people out, its not about the greed agenda of the right wingers who keep going gimme gimme gimme more. Those in the top 1 percent went from having around 9 percent of the total income earnt each year 40 years ago to now having about 25 percent of the total income earnt in the country. Right Wingers are about greed and self interest at best... community?? family??? these are socialist concepts.. if you are talking about an ideal where people give a crap about each other anyway. This theory that you have that socialism is about government reliance is a fictional one that right wingers have made up. This theory that you and Don John key boy seem to have is that the market should control everything... however the market is faulty and corrupt as witnessed in the recent recession... how many company directors around the world... including here got arrested?. The National party way makes the top 1 percent wealthier... it allows them to use bogus economic theories like the "trickle down theory" which is as I said a bogus theory designed to fool you into believing that things will eventually get better for you... so long as you allow John Key and his buddies to give the wealthy an extra special tax cut. Right Wing doctrine teachers you that work is god, your employer is god, your government is god... it doesnt teach family or community values... it destroys family... denegrates it, treats it as something that gets in the way, which is why women on average still get paid less than men in the workforce. Socialism means you give a crap.. your right wing agenda means the 99 percent get punished whilst the 1 percent lap up all that corporate welfare. The very concept of socialism is about community and thats not what National is about. They are merely building a brighter future for the 1 percent.

08 Nov 2011 05:57p.m.

David wrote:

Key is wrong about the welfare trap: after the poorest children have received the extra $70/ week, there is still a substantial gap between the benefit and minimum/ low wages. Raising the minimum wage along with other changes to the tax system means the In Work Tax Credit is no longer needed to incentivise transition work. It also means that what economists call the Effective Marginal Tax Rate (the rate at which extra gains from employment earnings are taxed away through abatement arrangements) is lower than it was. Labour's plans will undoubtedly lift lots of children out of poverty, and support more opportunities for work by making sure the 20 hours free ECE is available. I think it's the right thing to do.