Labour Promises Built on Faulty Premises
Addressing this weekend's Labour Party Conference, Deputy Leader and Welfare Spokesperson, Annette King, singled out the
domestic purposes benefit as a policy that would change under their new 'putting children first' philosophy.
"Unfortunately Ms King doesn't properly understand the dimensions of existing DPB dependence and its effect on children,
"said welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell.
"Ms King claimed that, 'Around 70% of people on the DPB move off the benefit in 4 years, it's used as a family
transition.'
In striking contrast recent Ministry of Social Development research found that:
/On average, sole parents receiving main benefits had more disadvantaged backgrounds than might have been expected: /
/ • just *over half* had spent at least *80%* of the history period observed (the previous *10 years* in most cases)
supported by main benefits[1]
/Ms King went on to criticise National for cutting training support for sole parents yet a Treasury Report/ /to the
Welfare Working Group/ /found that the Training Incentive Allowance may have actually resulted in beneficiaries staying
on welfare for longer;
/Fifty-one percent of DPB recipients participating in an intervention took the Training Incentive Allowance, which MSD
found to have no effect on the time a beneficiary was likely to spend off benefit – in fact the study found there was a
chance TIA slightly increased the average time spent on benefit. MSD did note there was a chance that TIA may have an
unobserved long-term impact (after seven years) on time spent off benefit.[2]
/The speech also claims that the DPB does not provide an adequate income. Yet a typical DPB recipient with two children
living in Auckland receives $580 per week [3], significantly more than someone working full-time on the minimum wage
earns. Hence the incentive to move off a benefit is reduced. International research shows that the higher benefit
payments are, the more workless households result."
Mitchell says that starting from so many faulty premises does not bode well for the potential of Labour's promises to
improve the prospects of children on welfare.
[2] http://ips.ac.nz/WelfareWorkingGroup/Downloads/Working%20papers/Treasury_Report_WWG_Sept2010.pdf
[3]http://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/newsroom/factsheets/future-focus/domesticpurposes-benefit.html#ImportantstatisticsaboutDPB7
ENDS