National will aim to get 46,000 people off welfare over four years and into work, and a further 11,000 working part-time in a package estimated to cost NZ$130 million a year week.
The changes to the party's welfare policy announced in Hamilton today focused primarily on sole parents.
Prime Minister John Key said the new benefit system would consist of only three main benefits as existing ones were lumped into three categories: Jobseeker Support, Sole Parent Support, and Supported Living Payment (see graphic below).
The goal of getting those 57,000 beneficiaries into some kind of work was on top of the Pre-elction fiscal update (PREFU) forecast of 20,000 few people on welfare by 2016, Social Development Minister Paula Bennett said.
Strong signal
"I believe that changing benefit categories, and asking more people to make themselves available for work, sends a strong signal about the degree of change we are seeking – not just to beneficiaries, but also to case managers at Work and Income, and to the general public," Key said.
"It will help to shift people’s attitudes and set genuinely different expectations about being available for work. It is also part of the new investment approach we are taking to welfare. If we can spend money in the short term to reduce dependency in the longer term, it ultimately saves the government, and therefore taxpayers, significant costs," he said.
Social Development Minister Paula Bennett said the NZ$130 million a year price tag over the four years from July 2012 would lead to expected savings of NZ$1 billion over that period as beneficiaries entered work. The costs would be made up of new and reprioritised funding for more childcare, extra staff and IT costs, Bennett said.
Dole, sickness, sole parents with youngest child 14 or over
Jobseeker Support would be the biggest benefit category with 135,000 beneficiaries, focussed on getting people currently on the Unemployment Benefit or Sickness Benefit, and sole parents whose youngest child is 14 or older, into work.
"Everyone receiving the Jobseeker Support will be expected to be available for work, either full-time or part-time as their capacity allows. The only exception will be for people who cannot work for the time being, because of sickness or injury, and who will therefore get a temporary exemption," Key said in Hamilton.
This was quite a different approach from the way the Sickness Benefit, in particular, currently worked, he said.
"We are going to work more actively with people towards a target return-to-work date, and we are going to introduce much more comprehensive work capacity assessments to get a better picture of what people can do and to determine what the right obligation is for each person," Key said.
"The new approach recognises that most people will recover their health and ensures they receive the right help and support to be employable again," Key said. And it also recognises that work can be a key part of getting well," he said.
Sole parents would also be treated differently under the new benefit system. Sole parents whose youngest child was 14 or over would be required to be available for full-time work, and would fall under the Jobseekers Support benefit.
"There is no over-riding reason why these sole parents can’t work full time – and in fact a great many outside the benefit system do. The age threshold is also a fair one, because when children are 14 they can be left without parental supervision," Key said.
Sole parents with kids under 13
Other sole parents would go onto a benefit called Sole Parent Support, which would require sole parents on this benefit having to be available for part-time work when their youngest child was five years old, which lined up with the age most children started school.
"Other sole parents, while they won’t face work obligations, may be required to undertake pre-employment activities that will increase their likelihood of getting a job in the future," he said.
Parents who had an additional child while on a benefit would receive a temporary exemption from their existing work obligations, but that would only last for 12 months.
"Part-time and full-time obligations will remain at 15 and 30 hours a week, and we will introduce more flexibility around these targets," Key said.
"For both jobseekers and sole parents, we will provide more support earlier on, particularly for those groups most at risk of long-term benefit dependence. This support won’t be fully in place in year one, but will build up over time," he said.
Too sick or disabled to work
The third benefit would be called the Supported Living Payment, and would be for two groups of people: those who are permanently and severely disabled or terminally ill, and who currently receive the Invalids Benefit, and people caring for someone who requires the equivalent of hospital-level care, who currently receive a benefit called the DPB – Care of Sick and Infirm.
People on the Supported Living Payment would not be expected to make themselves available for work.
Details after election
The extra requirements on parents would generate a greater demand for childcare for pre-schoolers and school children, Bennett said. The government would look at ways to help people with these costs, with officals currently working on details. However the details of any compensation would not be released by the November 26 election, Bennet told a press conference in Hamilton.
The numbers
(Corrects week to year in first paragraph)
(Updates with video of Key announcing policy, 'the numbers')
45 Comments
The pifigs just love welfare!
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article31252.html
or is that fipigs
no it's the gifips
Ready Fire Aim....don't ya just love the scripts...."National will aim"....The new normal is ...well it's the new normal...this is it....work hard and it may not get any worse...odds are it will....
Could the socialists borrow us a route to financial Utopia?....not a hope in hell....but they would get us to the financial slaughterhouse twice as fast.
Instead of taking "aim" when they can't even see a target....the govt ought to begin to remove the $1.1billion sudsidy they hand over to landlords ever year...year after year....and they should begin to cut away the WFF pork handout....and slash the bloated state sector salaries...
Probably, but just think of all the rental property the government is effectively subsidising for these beneficiaries. As successive governments have proved time and again their number one priority is maintaining property values... so theres no way they're going to provide any plan to ship these people out.
Too true, hamrod.
Olly Newland really pillored the National Government of the 1990s for Ruth Richardson's "Mother of all Budgets". He held them responsible for the collapse of the real estate market of the time.
http://www.empowereducation.com/products-page/books/the-day-the-bubble-bursts/
It well probalby cost 2 billion a year to get the scheme to work.
Hey why don't the people on welfare do the job of getting themselves back to work, like most people do:)
Its and ambitious policy - great if it works, heaven knows NZ needs it.
Alot don't want to work, rather sit around the house watching TV and tending their cash crop.
Listening to you - so far empty words - PM !
Alex/ Bernard now in election time is a bigger change for the NZmedia to approach the PM with some tough questions about he’s and the National Party economic agenda.
The private sector struggling, where does the government do its share and support the production sector and the reduction of unemployment ?
PM – where are the 170’000 new jobs coming from, when you are constantly importing things in the billions ?
PM – in what industries are Kiwis, particularly, NZyouths going to be employed, when your government constantly taking away interesting, skilful jobs to overseas workforces ?
PM – why do we have in this country youth education programs costing taxpayers money millions, when there are no decent jobs and our youngsters are forced to move overseas ?
PM – how can we have a solid, more complex, better coordinated production sector, covering our needs, when you import them in the billions ?
..and PM why are you wondering – why we need more money for unemployment, prisons, and the police force ?
..and PM, by importing most everything and not producing in NZ – why are you wondering, why NZwages of the wider population remain low, families are financially struggling and our account deficit is going up ?
..and PM when you aren’t able to answer these questions to satisfactory – why not start thinking building up a new economic philosophy – not running for growth, stop megalomania - competing in the worldwide race – but modesty – for a balanced NZsociety with quality of life under an average standard of living and not much debts ?
--
Bernard/ Alex, please print that question catalogue out and ask the PM – next time you meet him. No - I don’t charge you for my work - it’s free.
I cant quite understand with so many un-employed that we cant source much of the labour from such ppl instead of importing....I really wonder why we cant simply stop all immigration, until we see a recovery. Are we really saying that there are not the NZers out there capable?
regards
"The immegrants are usually low skilled, offering little value to the NZ and take a large protion of the wealth earned out of the country with them.
Young kiwis should doing this work and developing a good worh ethic".
And those immigrants' English spelling and grammar skills are awful too...
A local kiwifruit grower told me he won't employ locals (mainly young) again. Said immigrants at least turn up for work, work until the job is done and don't refuse to work on a weekend (well, they say they will but never turn up).
A work ethic is absent from a significant number of the local unemployed.
Good points Kunst.
If we are going to put incentives in place or financial pressure to get folk off their arses and get a job, which is fair and reasonable WTF are we doing deliberately undermining our work prospects and our labour force.
I see manufacturing has shrunk again - full time equivilent workers down a wopping 3.5% for the quarter. We have foreign crewed fishing boats, overseas fruit pickers, farm workers, forestry workers, miners and immigrant taxi drivers in their thousands. Is John Key's plan to have a common labour market with Vanuatu or Vietnam? If this madness continues it won't be the wages gap between us and Aussie we'll be closing.
And what if they don't reach the reduction target - do we get a refund?
All the "gladwrap" initiatives in the world aren't going to create jobs.
Bring in the Big Kahuna and get the WINZ employees out there competing with their clients for what jobs there are available. What in the world sort of useful skill does working for WINZ prepare anyone for in the real economy, I wonder?
Reforming the welfare system. Great idea.
Only jobs reduce the number on benefits and they are not creating any.
So I would like to see this policy also linked to an investment in up skilling and job creation, otherwise its really not going to make much difference.
".... otherwise its really not going to make much difference."
like spending a few hundred million on consultants and bureaucrats to screw a few hundred million out of beneficiaries
What is with the Tories fixation on reforming Welfare and putting the boot in to people who are already down?
It never works and just causes hardship for the weakest people in society - the hardship should be going on those that can handle it - not the other way around.
A self centered society of hypocricy and greed is the problem - not a few billion in dignity payments to the needy.
Sure weed out the long term bludgers but if anything is needed to be reformed it should be centered around tax avoidance and income sheltering at the top end - not a few hundred million at the bottom end
What a load of drivel. The biggest beneficiaries by far are finance companies and banks where profits are privatised and losses are socialised. The scandanavian countries which are very much a welfare state model seem to be thriving, so it's obviously something else which is screwing the economy rather than welfare.
What rubbish. The beneficiaries I know don't drink, don't smoke, and don't gamble. I know of people who have applied for at least half-a-dozen jobs a week for months and never even gotten a reply, let alone an interview.
I know people who have been made redundant after years of service (upto 15) with no holiday pay and no redundancy. One case involves at least 100 employees who, for the past two years, have been trying to take a class action against some of the swindling bullies who call themselves our top entrepreneurs, only to be thwarted, delayed, & diverted at every turn.... by people who have more money and more time on their side.
I know we have some people at the bottom who cope better than others... and our welfare system has its share of problems... but to tar everyone on a benefit as losers is rude and ill-informed.
Some of the nicest children I have met have parents on a benefit. Some of the best gardens I have seen belong to people on a benefit. These are people who share amongst themselves, look after each other, because they have to. Otherwise they wouldn't cope.
These are the people to go to when you're in trouble. They will open their house to you, feed you, clothe you, because they know what it's like to struggle.
Many of them are positively involved in the community... although our stupid system won't let them get too involved because then they wouldn't be available for full-time work!
Many have dabbled in home-businesses and self-employment... but again, this is a slippery slope because the idea HAS to work, and work quickly... because otherwise WINZ judges them as not available for full-time work.
The worst thing is how the system puts so much pressure on those at the bottom... if it makes you feel any better most beneficiaries HATE WINZ and their staff and would do anything not to have to deal with them.... and if they could get a job they would.
Unfortunately many of them haven't had the education you've probably had, arn't as smart as you, and they often can't see a way out.
So yes, let's make it harder at the bottom... forget the carrot... grab the stick... find someone who matches all your prejudices and lay into them... work up a real sweat and give a whoop when you draw blood.
What a hero! Yeh, right.
One more thing... I often see the contention that we face a decade or more of low or negative growth.. and that the unpalatable truth is that we may all have to cut our clothe to suit... and that many, if not most of us, might even (heaven forbid!) have a decline in living standards....
Well many, if not most, people on a benefit are there already. They have been on a decline and many probably feel like there's not much further to fall.
Yes, the benefit system has to be over-hauled... not dismantled.
Keep these people feeling like they still have a stake in the system. Help them to be more involved in the local community. Recognise the positive things they do without threatening them. Help them become more resilient, encourage them to work co-operately with each other, even to start their own businesses.
When (if) the economy picks up again these people will be available and ready to take advantage of it.
If the economy continues its inexorable slide into the mud... then you will appreciate the strong community base that has been forged beneath your feet.
Or... we could just say that it's a dog-eat-dog world out there... but then don't expect any sympathy when the dogs turn on you.
For anyone who didn't view the most excellent TED video of Niall Ferguson posted on this site:
1. Competition
Government must remove itself from commerce and deregulate where practical.
2. Education
Regardless of any potential for brain drain.
3. Property Rights
Must respect private ownership and break monopoly practice.
4. Medicine
Basic health care is required.
5. Consumer Society
In a paraphrase of Henry Ford, the job of the industrialist is to produce as much and as cheaply as possible whilst paying workers as much as possible.
6. Work Ethic
They who can work must work
ONE WORD: HYPOCRISY
Paula Bennett has the audacity to stand there after claiming a LIFE TIME of government benefits! We paid for the birth of her children, we pay for em to go to school, we paid for her DPB, we paid for her Uni education, and NOW she has the gaul to stand there like god's gift to the Woman's Weekly!
Go figure NZ. Wake up people. Here before you stand a bunch of GRAVY TRAIN parasites, BENEFICIARIES THEMSELVES claiming they are more worthy while claiming a income adjusted for ACTUAL inflation EVERY YEAR!
Up to you NZ, wake up or be forever exploited.
Stuff reports: "beneficiaries who had a subsequent child while on a benefit .... would be required to look for work once their youngest child was 12 months old, if their previous children were over five"
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5891410/Welfare-shake-up-calle…
Now I don't have any great problem with "tough-love" policies for beneficiaries.
But what gets me riled up is the failure to spread the pain around. While beneficiaries are targeted, baby boomers get to keep 100% of their capital gains from property and business investments. Perfectly healthy & wealthy workers get superannuation at 65. The middle class get welfare thru WFF.
It all makes any concept of equity seem a sick joke.
Cheers.
Just one small difference there Philly...the 65 year old does not have a choice in the matter...the person on the DPB with a child under 5 has the option to not produce another sprog. Think about that. Those in their 50s who were shafted by a previous bunch of liars when the pension age was bumped to 65, will have worked hard at saving a bit extra to make life on the pension possible. And the person who collected the DPB can look forward to the pension as well.
So how about we say the DPB is deducted from any future pension payable to both parents! That DNA testing is done to identify fleeing males. Failure to front up is a crime. DNA of child to remain on database to catch father when he is caught by the law for other offences.
As for screaming hate about the filthy rich getting the pension..if they are filthy rich the tax on the pension will reduce it to near nothing.
Thanks for your response, Wolly
As I said, I have no trouble with tough-love for beneficiaries (tho to be honest your rhetoric turns into something reminiscent of 1930s Germany towards the end, a teeny bit scary - "screaming hate" etc - I prefer reasoned debate to loaded language).
I just feel that we have to be realistic about how affordable it is to keep paying benefits to everyone over 65, especially when you consider that the cost is far beyond what is spent on DPB and the dole.
& it is an exaggeration to say that baby boomers have all "worked hard at saving a bit extra" - my observation is that many have relied on a very generous taxation regime for property to passively do the job for them.
As for "the person who collected the DPB can look forward to the pension as well". Well, who actually believes that the current level of superannuation will still be available when the current solo mum turns 65? John Key apparently, but I think he is the only one in the country.
I just think that a bit of balance would be nice. It will certainly be influencing how I vote later in the month. & before you say it, I am no lefty.
Cheers
Not getting a benefit or the pension me....years away for me....The 'accommodation supplement' is a subsidy to landlords that distorts the rental market driving up rents and therefore the price of properties, making it too hard for low income families to buy, forcing them to rent...
If this subsidy were cut away over a ten year period, the distortion would go...the billion dollars plus each year would not have to be paid out....so it wouldn't have to be borrowed....
How hard is this to understand.
Remove the distortion, reduce the splurge, pay down the debts, reduce the gst and lower the new build cost leading to more real work.....why is this so hard to understand?
As for the DPB..there is no need to bash those getting it...only some are determined to 'milk' the system..most strive to get off the benefit....So the govt should focus on the group that regards the DPB as a good rort.
That focus must include the 'fathers'. It means a need for a dedicated hunt by a specialist body to track down and deal with the ones who refuse to make payments and who go on to produce more babies without a care in the world. "Deal with" includes confiscation of property, loss of pension rights, loss of dole rights and in the end....prison on an island devoid of females...The Auckland islands would serve this purpose quite well.
The problem has become so bad because of the hand wringing dithering rubbish dished out by decades of pollies too gutless to act.
As for the women who rort the system, popping out sprogs to keep the payments going...take the babies into state care by force. End the flow of cash. Plenty of childless couples wanting to adopt....
only some are determined to 'milk' the system
Pity they can't 'milk' it properly, like some of our leading politicians, financiers, and industrialists do. So a few people at the bottom do their best to get a little more than they're entitled to... well, they've had great role models... but few (if any) of them manage to get away with the millions that our more accomplished 'milkers' manage.
Isn't it funny how the most derogatory phrases are reserved for those at the bottom of the food chain... feeding on the scraps from the masters table....
If a couple of solo mums and a few drunks were the biggest problem we had then I'd say we'd be in a pretty good position....
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.