To get something going here....
From the poverty focussed candidate meeting yesterday at Knox Church: "'Assault' on beneficiaries criticised" (ODT) - and it was claimed that all beneficiaries were "desperate" for work.
What does each candidate think about this? Are no beneficiaries "using" the system'?
Or should no beneficiaries be criticised so other beneficiaries don't feel put down?
Peter
Candidate Answers
Candidate
Answer
Many beneficiaries simply cannot find work while others do not want to work.
However if we do not provide the benefit then many will be left with no money what-so-ever and struggle to survive.
This is exactly what will happen to cannabis users on the dole if National is re-elected.
We encourage anyone concernd about losing their dole to vote for the ALCP.
For those who want to find work should be encouraged to start their own small business and become self employed.
Legalising cannabis would increase government revenue and create jobs so we would not have to slash benefits for those who need them in the name of austerity.
Most of those on benefits are deserving of taxpayer assistance. Many of them find it very hard to get by on what they get.
It can be very tough finding work in the current job climate.
But it's clear that a minority of beneficiaries (and state housing tenants) "use the system" and get maximum benefit they can without putting serious effort into becoming self supported - some actively avoid the moral imperative to find ways of looking after their own needs.
And some are too fussy and/or unrealistioc about what sort of work they will do
If any hint of criticism is shouted down as "bennie bashing" it effectively gives support and encouragement to those who are abusing the system.
Those that do abuse the system are not only abusing those who pay tax (many of whomalso find it tough to get by) but they also abuse deserving recipients of benefits, both by giving all beneficiaries a bad name and by using taxpayer money that could be beter used by people in greater need.
To address problems with benefit abuse it is necessary to be able to discuss the problems and not be labeled as heartless and greedy.
There will always be people abusing the beneficiary system. It’s about helping people in any way we can to rediscover the value of a good days work and contributing to society. I believe that a lot of our people have lost their way and need a little bit of encouragement to be more motivated.
One way would be to ensure a base rate income for all New Zealanders that would reduce at a certain amount per week if the participant does not participate in any weekly activity. This can be paid work or volunteer work. This would effectively do away with the doll. Exceptions would still be sickness, invalids etc.
The other option is to re- educate beneficiaries into fields of interest or niche jobs that will need to be filled in the future. e.g. building industries (CHCH).
I also believe that we need to start at secondary level by teaching life skills that will help the young people to find their way in the real world and give them support to find a direction for their future jobs. A way of teaching life skills could be an on site granny flat where students (yr13) would live for a certain amount of time. They would be all self contained to learn about living in today’s world and all the challenges that come with it.
Rather than question whether some beneficiaries might be 'using the system' I prefer to focus on the vast majority who would like to enjoy better lives free of a benefit, but are part of a system that lacks a focus on intervening early. It is not good at directing resources early on, to help prevent people from becoming trapped in long-term benefit dependency. We can do this smarter and we will. We will take a long-term view of each individual entering the welfare system given their needs, challenges and prospects of a quick return to work. We will spend taxpayers’ money where it will have the biggest impact.
This means intervening earlier, investing in more support for those who’re capable of working but are likely to remain on benefit long-term without this support. For example, it makes sense to put more resources and support into helping a teen parent with no education than a university graduate who is between jobs. We will be more hands-on, supporting people into work, and we make no apologies for that.
We will expect more people on a benefit to make themselves available for work. But at the same time we will do more to help them into work through things like childcare, training, workplace support, and access to health and disability support services.
All of that will cost money. In fact, about $130 million a year some of which will come from our operating allowance and some from reprioritisation of other expenditure. But we are prepared to invest in these New Zealanders because the pay-off is a better life for beneficiaries and their children and, over time, a reduction in the long-term costs of welfare dependency.