What is the solution to child poverty?

Email
Print

What is the solution to child poverty?

3News NZ

Child poverty in New Zealand is an important matter. Too important to be greeted with political tribalism, absolving ourselves of personal responsibility, by blaming the party we didn't vote for.

In fact, in the 26 years since child poverty begin to grow markedly in this country, we've had thirteen years of Labour lead governments and thirteen years of National lead governments.

There have been spike points, the 1991 benefit cuts, for example, but no matter who's been in government, child poverty since 1991 has never been less than twice the level it was in 1986.

So, constructively, in the interests of our children rather than our political parties, what are we going to about the fact that the incidence of child poverty in New Zealand is unacceptably high.

Approximately 25 percent, or 270,000 of our children live in poverty.

Watch the video to see the full report.

Post a Comment

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


(Won't be published)



Comments

15/09/2012 1:11:45 p.m.

Geoff wrote:

the supermarkets have left over bread that is given away,prepackaged sandwiches,all could be given to schools.also have cheap meats etc that all could be given as well

4/09/2012 4:34:39 a.m.

Toby wrote:

The answer to this is really, really simple: sufficient employment – at least on GUARANTEED job per household. Then you could scrap the unemployment benefit altogether. It would have great ripple-on effects for the economy as I strongly suspect we'd see a reduction in many social harms. The reason we don't have enough jobs is also simple: because we have an economic system that rewards wealth over work. That is perverted. We have that system because the rich use their influence (money is power) at the expense of those without possessions. I am angry about it. I don't think poor people are inherently better than rich people, but poor people don't have the power to cause the harm that the rich do. If people started lynching the very rich in the street, I would only say "about time".

30/08/2012 6:47:57 p.m.

David wrote:

The problem with people like Mike, Eddie, Chris, Erm, Jim.. is they have no concept of reality.... They make massive generalisations such as... all beneficiaries drink, smoke, take drugs and beat their children. (behind closed doors those same right wingers are doing the same damned thing... shhhhhhh, its a secret though) These people are referred to as media specialists... many of the political parties use them. National are using theirs currently to try and get kiwis to believe all beneficiaries... drink, smoke, beat their children and that a person whould easily be able to survive on 40 percent of minimum wage. Act's specialists.. well, pretty much the same thing combined with "maori are bad" They pretend to be ordinary kiwis... but they are here to do a job... which is to try and fool you into believing that they know what they are on about. Unfortunately... not a single one of them do. The National Party/Act Party/ Labour/Greens are all paying them good money to come online and spread whatever they think needs spreading. So lets all take a moment to give them a little applause. Well done boys and boys pretending to be girls... New Zealand doesnt have people living in the streets.... I congratulate you for uncovering such a dastardly Left Wing lie. Poor families arent crammed into gargages of family members... bloody left wing liars. And if they are... well its because they do far too many drugs, smoke far too many cigarettes and breed far too many babies. Is that the official stance of the pathetically delluded little right wingers posting here?.

30/08/2012 11:26:17 a.m.

Devan wrote:

NZ likes to bragg to the world that it produces many intelligent high achievers on the global stage. This may be true yet at the other end of the spectrum there are many 'intellectually challenged' people living in NZ due to poor immigration policy or poor education outcomes. Children learn by example from their parents. If they have bad role models they are likely to become adults who make the same bad choices. The only way to break the cycle is for the state to show the children a better example ie feed, clothe, and educate them.

30/08/2012 6:57:34 a.m.

Wiseacre wrote:

To all you people who make the spurious claim that people should wait until they can afford children before having children. Many people had children when they had jobs and could afford it. Then National got into power and started wiping out jobs left, right and center. Companies are firing staff simply to make the bottom line look good in preparation for sale. That's not the workers fault. To all you people who say benefits are enough to support children on if you budget properly. Nonsense. In 1991 another National Minister - Ruth Richardson - had studies done to determine the absolute bare minimum required for someone to survive on a benefit. She then set benefit levels at 20% below that level in a perverse effort to provide *incentive*. All she did was entrench poverty in New Zealand. Of course, what it was really all about was creating a pool of desperate people forced to compete for low waged work. Their business cronies loved it. It is time to stop blaming the unemployed for unemployment.

29/08/2012 8:55:51 p.m.

Aleena wrote:

I have to agree with Vicki not everyone is on the benefit because they are lazy granted some are and they destroy the reputation for others but trying to raise a family on such a little income is not easy and David there are people who have children before they need the assistance how can the immagine they would end up needing government help. i feel if there is a way to help why not do it we see all those adds on tv about those children going hungry over seas and we have the same thing happening in our own back yard, whether you agree with the way the children are raised or not is that their fault NO!!!! we should want to do this for them if not their parents

29/08/2012 8:39:55 p.m.

Jim Seaview wrote:

QUOTE: "In fact, in the 26 years since child poverty begin to grow markedly in this country, we've had thirteen years of Labour lead governments and thirteen years of National lead governments."

Thirteen years each - both National and Labour are then equally responsible????

I note a lot of commentors are saying that Schools should start supplying breakfast and lunch for all children so that they have enough fuel to learn properly.

It is the parents responsibilty to feed their children and to provide them with a nutriciuos breakfast and a couple of sandwiches. @Mike has already priced breakfast at 55cents, add to that 4 pieces of bread, luncheon sausage and squirt of tomato sauce and that is enough.

What parent cannot afford to do that for their PRECIOUS child????

The worst aspect about the hard working, over RATEd, diligent taxpayer supplying a FREE breakfast & lunch is that it takes away the DIGNITY of the child.

This loss of dignity or 'face' can last for years especially if something goes wrong in their life and who do they look to remedy their problem - "THE STATE" as this institution has always been there in times of hardship.

That is my view.



29/08/2012 7:25:35 p.m.

steph007 wrote:

This is an appalling indictment on our country - and its time our politicians did some bipartisan work, put their egos aside and made an actual effort to work together to make sure our countries children have the foundation to be successful. What the public NEED to understand is this is NOT just a south Auckland issue - this happens in many many schools in NZ. And many schools do not have the access to the breakfast programme and struggle to do what they can. The worst travesty here is that we have a government and a Ministry of Education intent on using shoKEY PR to blind the public and mislead them about the quality of our schools and at the same time totally dismiss the impact that poverty has on our children. Hungry, cold, and sick children will struggle to met a 'standard' - and publishing 'league tables' not only presents an inaccurate picture of student learning and school success - its a mockery of our system. What we need is proactive solutions to the social, health and economic situation our students are in - and THEN watch the academic achievement fly.

29/08/2012 5:58:07 p.m.

Vicki wrote:

@ David, you are completely sexist - when is the last time you were pregnant and had a baby, have you tried carrying and giving birth to a child, let alone breast feeding and raising it? Us 'breeders' need to stand up against these old fashioned, completely unacceptable views.

29/08/2012 5:16:20 p.m.

rod wrote:

a garden