Caritas Aotearoa New Zealand
MEDIA RELEASE - 17 SEPTEMBER 2008
Social Welfare “Safety Net”Unravelling says Caritas
A new report finds that both National and Labour administrations over the past two decades have been steadily
unravelling our social welfare “safety net” and moving its basis from the meeting of basic need to the narrow focus of
pushing people into work.
The report The Unravelling of the Welfare Safety Net backgrounds changes to New Zealand’s social welfare benefit system since the benefit cuts of 1991. It was prepared by
the Beneficiary Advocacy Federation of New Zealand, for Catholic social justice agency Caritas, to provide historical
background on proposals for a “single core benefit”.
The 1972 Royal Commission of Inquiry into Social Security used the term “safety net” to describe the then vision of
social welfare which ensured the most basic level of financial support to allow all to participate in society.
“National leader John Key and Labour Minister of Social Development Ruth Dyson still confidently refer to a basic
‘safety net’ of social welfare assistance, but this report shows that both main parties have been pulling at the threads
holding it together,” says Caritas Research and Advocacy Officer Lisa Beech.
“Since the 1991 benefit cuts, there has been a continual dismantling of key aspects, particularly the loss of discretion
in granting supplementary assistance. This removes the ability to respond to particular individual needs as they arise,”
says Ms Beech.
Ironically, the present Labour government has introduced some of the changes, despite opposing similar moves by National
in the 1990s. For example, Labour successfully opposed removal of discretionary aspects of supplementary benefits in
1994-95, yet under urgency in the 2004 Budget legislation, it abolished the discretionary “last resort”special benefit,
in favour of the temporary additional support – for which eligibility is tightly defined in regulations, and in which
there is no discretion.
“The complexity of our benefit system comes from the increased expectation that people must apply for a range of
supplementary assistance just to meet everyday costs,” says Ms Beech. “It’s a direct result of the move from ‘targeted
welfare’ to ‘tight targeting’ which began with the 1991 benefit cuts, but has continued under successive governments
since.”
“This week the Catholic Church is considering poverty in our affluent society for its Social Justice Week. In recent
times of low unemployment and good economic times, perhaps many of us have become complacent about the very poor among
us, and about our benefit system – thinking help will always be there if we need it. This report shows that’s no longer the case.”
“We know the difficulties beneficiaries have getting supplementary assistance. Catholic organisations bear witness to
this beneficiaries are frequently unable to gain their proper entitlements without an advocate at their side.”
“Our concern for a fair and effective benefit system stems from Catholic principles holding that the needs of the
poorest members of our society must be given priority, and also our understanding that human beings are not isolated
individuals. We’re connected to each other. The goods of the earth are intended for all, and sharing through the
taxation and benefit system is one outworking of this perspective.”
Although Labour now intends to implement the “core benefit” proposals in 2009/10, and National says it does not support
the core benefit proposal at all, there are significant similarities in the approach by both major parties to
“simplifying” social welfare.
“With the country facing an election, and it seems tougher economic times, we want more commitment to supporting
people in their time of financial need,” says Ms Beech. “At the moment, the differences between Labour’s work-focused
incentives and National’s proclaimed ‘unrelenting focus on work’ are mainly differences of degree. Labour might prefer
the ‘carrot’ of incentives to what it says is National’s ‘stick’ of benefit sanctions. But if National has a stick with
which to beat beneficiaries, it’s because the present government provided it all the mechanisms for sanctions were put
in place last year by the Social Security Amendment Act.”
ENDS.
Copy of the full report at: http://www.caritas.org.nz/dox/Domestic%20Advocacy/Unravelling%20of%20the%20Welfare%20Safety%20Net.pdf