Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 


Child Poverty: Whose Fault Is It?


Child Poverty: Whose Fault Is It?

By Lindsay Mitchell

There have recently been repeated calls for more government spending to eradicate child poverty. This disregards the reality the "war on poverty" is flawed. Throwing ever-increasing wads of money at the problem is simply not working. The biggest creator of poverty, rather than reliever of poverty, is the welfare state.

However, I would first go back a step and question the very use of the word "poverty." There is only "relative" poverty in a country where governments pay people a living income. Real poverty exists in countries that cannot produce the necessities of life. So, when I refer to New Zealand poverty, I intend that of a relative kind.

Creating poverty isn't hard to do. The experience of being a parent shows just how easy it can be. Wouldn't life be easier in the short- term if we treated our children like the government treats beneficiaries? If we doled out money to them without having to nag them to earn it? If we didn't have to spend our scarce available time teaching them how to be independent? Let's face it, if we want their beds made, sometimes, it's less hassle to just get on and do it ourselves.

But we know we do our children a disservice by making life undemanding. We have a prime responsibility to teach them to fend for themselves, to teach them that nobody owes them a living.

Children learn by example. They sometimes demonstrate this unnervingly by adopting our mannerisms and actions to a tee. Therefore, second and third generation dependence on government handouts is only natural. Just as growing up in a single parent household lessens a child's expectation that they will themselves form an abiding relationship, growing up in a non-working single parent home (83% are reliant on benefits) reduces the expectation of one day getting up and going out to work in the morning.

If our annual welfare bill has gone from $256 million in 1970 to the $14 billion today, yet poverty has only increased, why should anyone believe throwing even more money at the problem will suddenly make a difference? In fact, accepting this strategy as an answer is dangerously foolish. Increasing benefit rates and widening availability will only draw more people in that direction.

Once on a benefit the only way for a single parent to get an increase in income is to get a job that pays more or have another child. It would seem the second option is commonly chosen. Nearly 19,000 or one in five people on the DPB, added another child to their benefit more then 42 weeks after it was initially granted. Advocates for the poor rigidly claim that they do not choose their circumstances. This particular group appeared to.

Going down the path that the Left and the Greens want to take us, namely increasing taxation to increase benefit expenditure, should be strenuously avoided. In the long term, everybody, including children, will actually be worse off. Many developed countries now recognise this. A good example is Ontario, Canada. In 1995 they embarked upon their "Common Sense" revolution (not one of the United Future variety.) They cut benefit rates by 21 percent because the levels were too generous. Even after the cuts, their rates were still higher than the average over the nine other Canadian provinces.

What these cuts did was allow simultaneous tax cuts, which in turn boosted jobs. Since 1995 their economy has added 824,000 new jobs. In March 1997, Ontario had 201,900 sole parents on benefits - by December 2002, the number had dropped to 73,850. Incidentally, Ontario's population is 12 million. Ours is 4 million with 116,000 welfare reliant sole parents.

Some simplistically argue that similar results across the states of America were only achieved through time-limiting (if somebody can only stay on a benefit for 5 years all-up, after 5 years, of course you are going to see numbers drop). The Ontario example rebuts this argument because benefit numbers were reduced by two thirds without imposing time-limits.

The real "revolution" that took place in Ontario was the government began listening to the taxpayers who were questioning why being on welfare should be more attractive than working, why those on low wage incomes were getting less help than those on welfare and why the misuse and abuse of welfare had become so widespread.

These are the questions moving through the minds of more and more working New Zealanders. Unfortunately this group have become so brutalised by the politically correct, they are afraid to voice them publicly. It is the politically correct who shallowly bandy about the term "child poverty" as the necessitator for greater wealth redistribution amongst adults . They use children to serve their own ends, not unlike evil regimes use children as physical human shields.

There are solutions to New Zealand's poverty problem but we will only begin to make progress when the taxpayer finally understands that government spending is not one of them. Only when parents assume full responsibility for their own children will child poverty ease.

Lindsay Mitchell is campaigning for a Parliamentary review of the DPB.
Further information and petition forms are available from http://www.liberalvalues.org.nz email mailto:dandl.mitchell@clear.net.nz ph/fx 04 562 7944

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

 

Ruataniwha: DOC, Hawke's Bay Council Developer Take Supreme Court Appeal

The Department of Conservation and Hawke's Bay Regional Investment Company (HBRIC) are appealing to the Supreme Court over a conservation land swap which the Court of Appeal halted. More>>

ALSO:

With NZ's Marama Davidson: Women’s Flotilla Leaves Sicily – Heading For Gaza

Women representing 13 countries spanning five continents began their journey yesterday on Zaytouna-Oliva to the shores of Gaza, which has been under blockade since 2007. On board are a Nobel Peace Laureate, three parliamentarians, a decorated US diplomat, journalists, an Olympic athlete, and a physician. A list of the women with their background can be found here. More>>

Gordon Campbell: On The Key Style Of Crisis Management

At Monday’s post Cabinet press conference Key was in his finest wide- eyed “Problem? What problem?” mode. No, there wasn’t really a problem that top MPI officials had been at odds with each other over the meaning of the fisheries policy and how that policy should be pursued... More>>

ALSO:

Mt Roskill: Greens Will Not Stand In Likely Post-Goff By-Election

“The Green Party’s priority is changing the Government in 2017, and as part of that we’ve decided that we won’t stand a candidate in the probable Mt Roskill by-election... This decision shows the Memorandum of Understanding between Labour and the Green Party is working." More>>

ALSO:

Wellington: Predator Free Capital Plan

Wellington City Council (WCC), the Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) and NEXT Foundation, today announced a joint collaboration to make Wellington the first Predator Free capital city in the world. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On Judith Collins’ Efforts At Self Correction

Thousands of prisoners currently in prison may be entitled to an earlier release than expected – and compensation – because Corrections has incorrectly calculated their term of imprisonment. Unless of course, the government buries its mistakes by changing the law and retro-actively getting itself off the hook… More>>

ALSO:

More Justice & Corrections

Sector Opposes Bill: Local Government Bill Timeframe Extended

The Minister of Local Government Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga has asked the Select Committee to extend the report back date for the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2). More>>

ALSO:

Get More From Scoop

 

LATEST HEADLINES

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Politics
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news