This is a distinct possibility given the existing habit of treating children as meal tickets.
A similar incentive operates when a parent is required to find a job when their youngest child reaches a prescribed age. Ensuring the youngest is always under that age relieves the parent of an unwanted responsibility. The last National government endeavoured to prevent this evasion with their 'subsequent child policy' but Labour duly repealed it on becoming government.
But what is the alternative bureaucrats want, given their warning? That 18 and 19 year-olds should continue to be given Jobseeker as some form of contraceptive??
The corollary to their warning is, "...some young people may be incentivised to have children to gain access to income support."
That would also be an entirely fair and accurate assessment.
Exploiting babies as meal tickets is horrible behaviour. But it isn't new behaviour.
Unlike the United Kingdom, in NZ every new baby comes with a substantial increase in benefit payments of around $190 -217 weekly. There is no cap.
Earlier this week it was reported internationally that the UK government is coming under immense pressure from activists to lift their two-child benefit cap, in place since 2017. The picture painted is of a cruel and callous government intentionally forcing children into poverty.
The reality is this. It is cruel and callous to incentivise the birth of otherwise unwanted children.
And it is a cruel and callous person who produces a child purely for their own monetary gain.
Yes, some have become accidentally pregnant and require temporary assistance. Yes, some have been abandoned by or need to separate from a partner and require temporary assistance.
But these original reasons for statutory aid have been overwhelmed by a behemoth of a system wherein becoming an unemployed parent entitles one to all manner of state largesse indefinitely and as of right.
That is the crux of the problem and leads to the current absurdity of state officials warning that babies might be used to secure income.
In a relatively wealthy country where one in five children is born onto a benefit, there is no 'might' about it.
Lindsay Mitchell is a welfare commentator who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced
But what is the alternative bureaucrats want, given their warning? That 18 and 19 year-olds should continue to be given Jobseeker as some form of contraceptive??
The corollary to their warning is, "...some young people may be incentivised to have children to gain access to income support."
That would also be an entirely fair and accurate assessment.
Exploiting babies as meal tickets is horrible behaviour. But it isn't new behaviour.
Unlike the United Kingdom, in NZ every new baby comes with a substantial increase in benefit payments of around $190 -217 weekly. There is no cap.
Earlier this week it was reported internationally that the UK government is coming under immense pressure from activists to lift their two-child benefit cap, in place since 2017. The picture painted is of a cruel and callous government intentionally forcing children into poverty.
The reality is this. It is cruel and callous to incentivise the birth of otherwise unwanted children.
And it is a cruel and callous person who produces a child purely for their own monetary gain.
Yes, some have become accidentally pregnant and require temporary assistance. Yes, some have been abandoned by or need to separate from a partner and require temporary assistance.
But these original reasons for statutory aid have been overwhelmed by a behemoth of a system wherein becoming an unemployed parent entitles one to all manner of state largesse indefinitely and as of right.
That is the crux of the problem and leads to the current absurdity of state officials warning that babies might be used to secure income.
In a relatively wealthy country where one in five children is born onto a benefit, there is no 'might' about it.
Lindsay Mitchell is a welfare commentator who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced
1 comment:
And if others can’t see this as an accurate depiction-they are naive. It is happening-no question.
Post a Comment