Tougher stance on welfare announced - Story - Politics - 3 News
3News » Home
Full Story

Tougher stance on welfare announced

14 comments | Post Comment Email Print Text Size:
aA
aA
aA
Tue, 09 Feb 2010 2:53p.m.

The Government is signalling a tougher stance on benefits as it attempts to bring what it says is the increasing cost of welfare under control.

In his opening speech to Parliament today, Prime Minister John Key said welfare reform was essential to reduce long-term benefit dependency and to ease the taxpayer burden of the welfare bill, which was expected to increase rapidly in the coming decades.

"We owe it to our children, the taxpayers of the future, to bring welfare rolls back under control," he said.

Changes would include tougher criteria and testing for sickness benefits, stricter re-application rules "to prevent people languishing" on the unemployment benefit between jobs, and increased work and training expectations for those on the domestic purposes benefit.

While acknowledging that some people would realistically never be able to work, Mr Key said benefits should provide only temporary support until people were able to return to work.

"Our benefit reforms will therefore be squarely focused on helping people get back to work as soon as possible, and ensuring that they do so," Mr Key said.

"These welfare reforms will have positive effects not just for beneficiaries themselves but for the sustainability of the welfare system."

However, taxpayers would continue to face an increasing welfare bill over the coming decades despite changes to the welfare system.

Mr Key singled out the sickness benefit, which had been "allowed to grow out of control" in recent years. The number of sickness beneficiaries was expected to increase by as much as 50 percent over the next 15 years.

An expert working group would be set up to recommend ways to reduce long-term welfare dependency and the future taxpayer cost of welfare, he said.

Mr Key also indicated social services were in need of a shake-up to combat child abuse, family violence, poor educational results and crime, particularly in Maori and Pacific communities.

"I have said it before, and I'll say it again today: I worry that there are signs of an emerging underclass in New Zealand," he said.

Social services spending was not delivering its intended results, and the Government would look to improve its services by reducing bureaucracy and improving co-operation between different organisations and programmes.

Mr Key also reiterated his commitment to the Whanau Ora policy, which aims to improve the Government's approach to assisting families in need.

The Government would carefully consider the recommendations of the Whanau Ora taskforce, which was due to deliver its report shortly.

"The status quo isn't working, hence the Government's willingness to consider new ideas."

NZPA

 

Comments [14]

Alan
14 Feb 2010 6:40p.m.

Well here we go again the Govt benifecy bashing again. What john Key has not admitted we get (on the invalid benifit)lass than $20,000 a year and pay taxes YES WE PAY TAXES.So John Key is sp[eaking through what he sits on.Another National stab in the back for all low income earners and if they arnt blinded by there political party the Maroi who will be most affected of do they have ther own system in place for the dole???

Warren Matthews
13 Feb 2010 2:37p.m.

Does anyone else see the irony in Government creating policies encouraging the loss of NZ jobs and businesses, then many years later retracting or diminishing the safety net system not because all beneficiaries won't work but because there are NO jobs, potentially due to... Government policies. Just a side note to those thinking Labour will 'save' us. National was in before Labour, and Labour way back before National and it takes many years for the detrimental policies of BOTH National AND Labour to distill through to full effect. Until we get to <5% unemployment + sickness + DPB the problem is not the people, its the Government. In my opinion.

Marmite & Weetbix
10 Feb 2010 11:02p.m.

John Key is promising that the increase of GST to 15% will be balanced with extra help for beneficiaries and those on low incomes. This 'tougher stance on welfare' will not help beneficiaries, instead it will create more poverty. If Key's government is going to be consistant they will also make large cuts to National Superannuation, as this is where 'the cost of welfare' is increasing the most.

Anna
10 Feb 2010 8:28a.m.

All this is doing is hurting good people who are trying their best to be self sufficient and independant in the first place. I am almost finished in a 6 month contract job that MSD paid for through a grant and instead of keeping me employed they've applied for another grant and MSD seems more than happy to just have me come back on a benefit because I'm now seen as a "new applicant" and it makes their stats look good to say "we've gotten XX number of people off benefits". Grants and "hand up" help provided should be given with the goal of PERMANENT employent being provided otherwise those of us with genuine disabilities are always at a disadvantage and no one ever wants to employ us.

Why hide behind good people
09 Feb 2010 11:03p.m.

This is just one way for National to lay blame on a poor section of the community in its attempts to sell its tax policy.

"We will compensate them" he said... for what saying its all their fault?.

People lost their jobs, there are very few out there, 3000 people line up for one job... its not much different to what happens in a recession.

However, remember that those numbers are up there Mr key because your mates ripped off the stock market and claimed bonuses that you little deserved.

And now that we have had a rough patch its time to blame the unemplyed or the sick for being such a burden?.

I think not, you cant hide the fact that good people in thie country are being treated like garbage while you all give yourselves extra money.

$500.00 a week for John Key.. that doesnt include his income on his $50,000,000 which would be about $3,000,000 a year if you had it in a fairly low interest savings account... now you get to save on the tax there too.

Whats that worth with the tax cuts, an extra $3000-4000 a week roughly.

The head of Telecom gets to pocket an extra $2400.00 per week.

The heads of our State Owned Enterprises get to take home an extra $1000.00 per week as well.

National always uses good people who wish that they were employed as an excuse, but you cant rob us blind and turn us away from the fact that you just made yourselves a whole lot richer.

Pack of thieving mongrels.

But
09 Feb 2010 10:57p.m.

@Blair what about those of us who work in the mornings or evenings? Are we not allowed to watch TV? What about at home mums and dads? And the fact is Labour had considerably less people on benefits than National. Every time National get in, benefit numbers go up.

Blair
09 Feb 2010 10:26p.m.

Would like to see less money for dole bludgers and more for students. Students on the allowance should be entitiled to extra money if they are in their second or third year of study, this would apply to students doing a diploma or a bachelor. Those doing a 1 year course wouldn't get the extra. The idea here is that it helps out students but not those who make a career of being a student jumping from 1 year course or 6 month course to course. Those that commit to a longer course get more as in the second year or third year can be more full on and you don't have time to work a part time job as well. Also why should Dole bludgers get the a larger accomodation supplement than students it should be the same.
Currently a single person over gets $190 a week, a student should get the maximum of $45 for accomodation and extra help if you have a mortgage. So should be $235 a week, on top of that 2nd year students should get 10% more on the $190 and 3rd year students 25% more. So a third year student should get 237.50 a week plus $45 for accomodation making it $282 a week. The way I see it those who go out and do a bigger qualification should get more as hopefully this will lead to that person getting a good job and never having to set foot in a Winz office again.

Sickness benefits I think already have to resubmit doctors certificate. Invalids benefit doesn't but that is for those who have a permanent injury preventing them from being at work long term or forever.

Totally agree with the idea of making those on the dole reapply after a certain time, however there should be no stand down period if unemployment is over a certain percentage. Also TV during the daytime shows like Opera, Dr Phil and whatever else should be replaced with a message on your screen saying "go find a job you bum"

Nigel
09 Feb 2010 9:46p.m.

The way I see it, the pushing of people from the unemployment benefit onto the sickness benefit is problematic, as is the number of seemingly genuinely sick people. Eligibility for the DPB needs an overhaul, but what can you really do to stop those who keep having kids to keep the benefit, without resorting to distasteful and unacceptable policies? For the genuinely sick, for single parents genuinely in need, and for the long-term unemployed that actually do try to get work, putting more pressure on them is probably the last thing they need. I'm sure most of them are already close to the edge, psychologically. Looking at transfers from the unemployment benefit to sickness is what I believe to be the highest priority. Next is paying for short-term upskilling of skilled workers that have been out of work for more than six months, lest they become de-skilled. This expenditure should be quickly recovered through income taxes, rather than continuing to pay unemployment benefits over an extended (possibly long-term) period. If a skilled worker in unemployed for more than six months, it is time to discover and help overcome the barriers to employment, before they are de-skilled.

Brian
09 Feb 2010 9:06p.m.

Jay: Stay with it, what more can I say? We all need to "pull in" hard behind you but who will? If I could give you my "details" I would but in saying that I applaud my anonymity. Wish it could be different.

aron
09 Feb 2010 8:17p.m.

Get tougher on benifits more people are going on them because there are no jobs. unemployment is rising how are they going to do this?
I do argee you should re apply for the unemployment benifit if you have been on it for more than 12 months.

Post a comment

Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:


3News Video 3News Audio

Post your opinion

3News - Smoking - a deadly habit we should ban, or would a ban be an example of the state going too far?
Comments (26)

Maori smoking inquiry - should we ban the cigs?

A select committee looking into the effects of smoking on the Maori community has seen tense scenes today, with politicians being accused of use smoki...