Interesting article in today’s Herald (the same one referred to by Jacinda Ardern) reporting on a New Zealand Institute report which shows that New Zealand has a high disadvantage rate. Only six countries have a worse disadvantage rate (the gap between rich and poor) among the 30 developed countries that make up the OECD. It was correctly noted that our country became much less equal in the 1990s under the last National Government.
The policies of the current National Government will no doubt worsen this situation. One of the earliest acts of this Government was to give tax cuts favouring the rich (30% of the cuts went to the top 3% of salary earners). We are likely to see further unfair tax changes in the May budget with increases to the regressive GST and further cuts in personal tax for high income earners. Access to lifelong learning opportunities which can assist people in many ways including improving their job opportunities such as Adult and Community Education and the Training Incentive Allowance have been cut.
The Government has placed scant attention on economic stimulus to create jobs or invest in skills.
A recent Salvation Army report ‘Road to Recovery’ stated that: “…there is no denying that the recession is taking a social toll. Unemployment is at a five year high, gains made over the last five years in reducing child poverty have probably been lost, and there are signs of a widening income gap between the well paid and the poorly paid”
There is an increasing body of evidence that shows that inequality creates a huge range of social problems. These problems include worse health and education outcomes, higher crime rates with consequent imprisonment rates and victim impacts. The reality is that unfair societies are not sustainable. We cannot bear the costs, direct costs and opportunity costs, of these problems.
The report – nzahead, which I have only had a chance to glance at, is interesting as the authors set out to foster debate. In fact they are explicitly seeking robust debate and say “Strong opinion and disagreement is a sign of a democratic society’s strength and vitality, not weakness, so long as it is done respectfully”. I agree and would like to see more New Zealanders debating what sort of country we want to be.
For me it is clear, I want a fairer New Zealand where there is opportunity for all. I believe we should explicitly measure all our policies to assess what they do to deliver greater fairness and opportunity. Let’s deliberately seek to become a more equitable country and close the gap between rich and poor. In the words of US President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937 “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little”
I don’t know. I wasn’t on the benefit when Labour was in really, only for the last 3 months of their term. All I know was I got TIA and then told that its not there next year and then 500 was put in its place. Not a lot if you consider teacher placement will cost 100 in childcare and it’s 6weeks at least per year.
Rebecca. It is National that is going to increase GST. National that introduced ETS which will hurt too, but yes food prices went up and up and up under Labour as well.
Also nothing is new. People on welfare have always had to look for work and prove you are looking. DPB parents always had to look for work when oldest turned 6. Threatening to cut it will only stress the ones that are looking and applying even more. The ones funding their lifestyle with drugs are not going to stop. They will continue as I’ve said before.
Rent power GST, all add up to making it harder. I’m know that the benefits have gone up due to inflation but $5 when rent has gone up $10 is hardly helping. I’m wondering if its going to go up when GST goes up or is that it?
I know cheese prices were shocking
But the ETS and GST are horrible. Raising GST is a bad idea 
National’s idea 
Legitimate complaints A Mother.
I know spud. Its was getting to the point where Mac and Cheese was going to be for birthday dinners only as a special treat. With GST on top of it it REALLY will be.
@ Spud GST is a good idea, its a tax that is the most difficult to avoid,its probably also the fairest if you choose to spend more or have more to spend then you will pay more tax than someone who chooses to spend less or who has less to spend.
And a happy easter to you too
Yes GST is impossible to avoid
But for us poor people it just means that our grub will be expensive 
Blip: whatever world you live in, it must be fabulous as it is clearly a far cry from reality. I don’t know if you have taken note of the title or of the information stated in the various posts on here. Poverty – that is, one’s ability to put food on their table, a roof over their heads and clothing on their back has greatly diminished in the last 10 years, most noticeably evident in the fact that food parcels have nearly tripled since 1999. All this while there was an increase of 300% in the number of people making it onto the rich list. Clearly things have not worked and need to change.
Spud: it is not about ideology it is about policy. I will support whoever puts our children first in terms of a reduction in abuse, food in the tummies, clothes on their backs and a warm place to sleep at night free from damp and overcrowding. These are things that have not improved in the last 10 years.
I think that unless NACT managed to actually make sure the increase in GST has no or very little impact on the lower incomes that it won’t go ahead. I think you will find more gains will be made from stopping the rich man who avoids paying their fair share, the rich man that has been taking the mickey since the top rate of tax and WFF was introduced.
So Rebecca marks a 4th person on this blog who recognises the fact that Labour is not what they used to be.
Despite what Rebecca claims, the fact is that child poverty reduced under the Labour government – and this is because of WFF.
GST increases do nothing to reduce income inequality as of themselves they are regressive – increasing disparity. And despite promiese that no one will be worse off – the indisputable fact is inconme disparity will increase because of the budget tax changes proposed.
SPC I have claimed nothing. I have stated facts: how do you explain that food parcel uptake more than tripled over the past decade where the city missions have been finding it almost impossible to keep up with demand? How can you not define this as poverty? Child poverty stats are always a little skewed as like poverty in general it is very difficult to measure. Poverty is when you can not meet your basic living costs, things that you should have as a matter of right – that is, food, clothing and shelter.
This is not about attacking Labour, it is about getting this country to recognise that we have achieved very little in the past 18 years despite the many surpluses. We have a health system that has and is failing miserably, a hugely dysfunctional youth who drop out of school or wag, more families & elderly than ever struggling to pay the rents/mortgages, school ‘donations’ groceries and power bills, a rate of violence that puts us well above most other democracies and child abuse that in the last 10 years which has more than doubled.
No government can ever say they got it right when at the end of their tenure, people are just as bad, sometimes worse off that what they were before they took office – despite that 9 year period including an time of unprecedented economic growth and success. No government can EVER say they got it right when at the end of their tenure child abused had jumped from 6000 substantiated cases to over 12,000.
I don’t care who does it, I just want solutions. Criticising solutions offered by the NACT has no credibility unless you provide alternatives.
I offer mine and I am fine with people not liking them. What I don’t like is the lack of viable alternatives. I am not sure what it will take for this country to recognise that we are going to hell in a hand basket.
. . . I know. Lets raise GST!!
LOL
I’m not arguing that food prices haven’t increased. I know they have. That is a fact.
On top of the other things I’ve mentioned about GST and ETS It is going to be harder now than every before. More people are on the benefit due to loss of jobs and many more NZers are finding it tougher so increasing GST and ETS pushing power prices up and heading into winter, its only going to get harder. I do not believe that the increase we may get will cover these increased expenses.
No GST on unprocessed food would be a good start, and an increase more than $5 due to inflation to help with power and rent due to recent changes making rents increase, more Housing NZ houses made avalible too. Bring back TIA is another option. There are some of my solutions Rebecca to help NZers get back on their feet.
Stating that they will have to do something and make it sound new to other NZers is only kicking people when they are down. I see it as a distraction more than a new policy because this isn’t new.
Rebecca – you have simply now chosen to call your claims facts (saying you claimed nothing and your claims were facts) – but you have given no facts to back your claims up. International (standardised) surveys show child poverty reduced – and the reason was WFF. That’s a fact.
Oh and it is pertinent to note that the governments tax reform proposal increases income disparity – given this is the topic we are debating.
As to alternatives, Labour has not opposed tax changes to property – as they should restrain property values (make owning homes more affordable). The money raised (depreciation write-offs and ring fencing property losses) does not need to go to reducing the top rate of tax, it should go to incentives for savings/investment.
As to the GST rise and awarding out money to compensate people – why bother? Real tax reform would involve a much broader approach. Why not 20% with exemptions for necessities?
SPC: the stats reported by the City Missions around the country are facts! They are the best measure of poverty.
People had better watch out, if things get any worse they may have to go out and hunt icecream…
Spud!!!!
Rebecca have you any evidence that the increase in food parcels was to children with families? No.
Was it old people facing rising power bills, was it the rising numbers on IB and SB?
And one suspects that where families were involved it was families on benefits – whereas low wage families were benefitting from WFF – WHICH TOOK MANY FAMILIES OUT OF POVERTY, the others were facing rising costs without as much extra help (unless they found jobs).
P.s A Mother – I agree with you especially re exempting GST from all raw/staple foods (raw + milk, cheese, butter, bread). Why is this so difficult? How come no one seems to be able to provide a good explanation as to why it is too difficult to do? If they can raise GST and have things like interest exempt from GST then why not change the law to exempt raw/staple food items?
SPC Yes I do – I have quoted the stats heaps. Most recently Auckland CIty Mission have reported the increases since 1999. They commented in 2007 on how WFF has not made any difference despite being in place for 3 years. I didn’t save the link so just google it and it will come out. There’s loads and loads and loads of stats that show how food parcels have doubled, sometimes tripled throughout the country in the last 10 years – all before the recession.
SPC – have managed to rummage up one article http://www.nzherald.co.nz/child-poverty-action-group/news/article.cfm?o_id=600551&objectid=10391137&pnum=0
the rest is up to you! cheers.
okay found two more:
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/news_national_story_skin/789395
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/news/print.cfm?objectid=10411793&pnum=2
can’t seem to find the actual report that diane robertson wrote – it maybe on the child poverty action group website.
Your 5.07pm link says
“While the Working for Families package will lift half of these out of poverty, the Child Poverty Action Group’s evaluation of Working for Families clearly shows that around 175,000 children are being left behind.
These are the children of beneficiaries who do not meet the criteria to benefit from the package. Seventy-five per cent of the children of beneficiaries are living in hardship.”
It confirms my point rather than your own – it says that WFF would halve the number of children in poverty (help those on low wages) – but the problem would be still remain for beneficiary families. This is the position shown by the international standard survey showing WFF reduced the number of children in poverty.
Note – there is no direct connection between the number of beneficiary families and the number of fodd parcels as not all beneficiary families have resorted to this help and nor are the number of food parcels to those without children identified.
Both your 5.14 reports are from 2006 (just after the first phase of WFF) and do not cover the full impact of the WFF help. While the first notes that WFF would help many, but not all, the second merely states that other forms of assistance would be required – suggesting no GST on food and housing subsidy (presumably as measures also including beneficiary families).
These people are not denying the help WFF provided (which reduced the number of families in poverty), just noting that those not covered by it are left behind in poverty. As for the increasing difficulties such people were facing – rising power and food costs, the reason is that the CPI index covers all costs (cheaper manufactured imports take down the average), not just necessities. There is a case for the CPI increase to benefits to be assesssed in a different way based on their actual living costs.
IMO the real value of the benefit (in terms of affording necessities) has reduced by as much as the 1991 cuts because of inadequate CPI adjustments since then. Both parties know this and have chosen to ignore it.
This is the reason for the difficulty for those families on benefits today – and thus for them food banks are becoming a routine part of their support. But despite that, the fact that WFF lifted the low waged poor out of povertry means there are less families in poverty than there were – of course while less, yet more desperate than ever (thus the busy food banks – the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff).
That’s my point SPC – I’m not denying WFF helped either however, poverty still grew even after 2006 and obviously things have become far worse when the recession started knocking at our doors. All you have to do is do a ring around the city missions etc and you will get all the “facts” you need. However, it looks like we are on the same page – as yes I agree, both parties have chosen to ignore real costs vs real wage & a living benefit.
No government can call their tenure a success when people are struggling the same, sometimes worse off than what they were at the beginning of their tenure, when City Missions have been constantly struggling to keep up with demand and when things like child abuse stats have doubled – that is, jumped from 6000 in 2000 to anywhere between 10,000 and 13,000 per year by 2008.
This country is in a very bad way and it didn’t happen in 18 months, it has happened due to at least 30 years of poor policy that lacked vision and foresight. Everyone wants a quick fix, no one is prepared to battle through solutions.
Btw, WFF is not new – all it is is a revamp of family assistance, child tax credit, accommodation supplement and childcare subsidies under one new title (WFF). These things have been around for years in one form or another. The 2004 merely modernised the concepts in terms of the thresholds, rates and criteria.