It's appalling that a quarter of a million children now need an income from the state to feed, clothe and house them.Data released under the Official Information Act shows over a quarter of a million children were dependent on welfare at December 2025.
At 31 December 2025 there were 255,300 children aged 0-17 reliant on a caregiver on a main benefit (234,429); or on an Orphan/ Unsupported Child benefit (20,871).
More than a third of all Maori children were dependent (36.5 percent) versus 16 percent of non-Maori.
Of the 57,705 births during 2025, one in five babies was welfare-dependent by year end. Dependence is established very early, often from birth. This pattern has persisted since the 1990s.
Over two thirds of the children rely on a single parent. Half of the children depending on Sole Parent Support are Maori.
For context, since December 2017 (when Jacinda Ardern made herself Minister for Child Poverty Reduction) the total under 18-year-old population has risen by 4.6 percent, whereas the number of under 18-year-olds dependent on a main benefit has risen by 31.2 percent.
Jacinda's prescription for solving child poverty was wrong.
New Zealand's 'child poverty' problem will not be solved while high numbers of children live in unemployed households. The ongoing response of raising benefit incomes and reducing the margin between work and welfare will only incentivise more people to opt for the latter. This normalises benefit dependency for children and the habit becomes inter-generational. Many of these children will spend their entire lives living on a benefit and develop an expectation of continuing this lifestyle as adults.
Chronic benefit dependency, lack of educational achievement, disproportionate use of health services, and contact with Oranga Tamariki and Corrections are all intertwined.
But perhaps the biggest tragedy is the thousands of children who are missing out on fathers. Personally, I lost my Dad last year and I miss that lifelong relationship. He was hugely influential in my life, I identified with him strongly and we understood each other. How many children are deprived of that inestimable value in their lives?
This country's approach has to change. I laid out a feasible policy here.
Let's hope at least one party will have the guts to make tackling this entrenched and worsening problem part of their election platform.
It's appalling that a quarter of a million children need an income from the state to feed, clothe and house them. These kids, and those that will inevitably follow, deserve a better chance of realising their own potential. This is still a first world country with ample opportunity for those who want to grasp it.
Lindsay Mitchell is a welfare commentator. This article was sourced HERE
Of the 57,705 births during 2025, one in five babies was welfare-dependent by year end. Dependence is established very early, often from birth. This pattern has persisted since the 1990s.
Over two thirds of the children rely on a single parent. Half of the children depending on Sole Parent Support are Maori.
For context, since December 2017 (when Jacinda Ardern made herself Minister for Child Poverty Reduction) the total under 18-year-old population has risen by 4.6 percent, whereas the number of under 18-year-olds dependent on a main benefit has risen by 31.2 percent.
Jacinda's prescription for solving child poverty was wrong.
New Zealand's 'child poverty' problem will not be solved while high numbers of children live in unemployed households. The ongoing response of raising benefit incomes and reducing the margin between work and welfare will only incentivise more people to opt for the latter. This normalises benefit dependency for children and the habit becomes inter-generational. Many of these children will spend their entire lives living on a benefit and develop an expectation of continuing this lifestyle as adults.
Chronic benefit dependency, lack of educational achievement, disproportionate use of health services, and contact with Oranga Tamariki and Corrections are all intertwined.
But perhaps the biggest tragedy is the thousands of children who are missing out on fathers. Personally, I lost my Dad last year and I miss that lifelong relationship. He was hugely influential in my life, I identified with him strongly and we understood each other. How many children are deprived of that inestimable value in their lives?
This country's approach has to change. I laid out a feasible policy here.
Let's hope at least one party will have the guts to make tackling this entrenched and worsening problem part of their election platform.
It's appalling that a quarter of a million children need an income from the state to feed, clothe and house them. These kids, and those that will inevitably follow, deserve a better chance of realising their own potential. This is still a first world country with ample opportunity for those who want to grasp it.
Lindsay Mitchell is a welfare commentator. This article was sourced HERE
16 comments:
Hmm, do they really "need" it? Dependency is a choice. If the state is going to offer an easy button, malingerers gonna malinger.
Back in the 1950s when ghe baby boomer generation was born, the families were quite typically born to parents who had virtually nothing especially compared with today.
That was real poverty, as it had been for their generation before them.
However, most of us were brought up on love, and support, made do with the little that we had and prospered as adults.
This is the wealthiest generation ever born !
Why are they in poverty ?
Why Maori in particular with all the extraordinary benefits available to them ?
Why when their tribes are rolling in money from settlements and mafia extortion of the government and general public, do they not have everything they need ?
The answer is simple: 1) don't have children if you can't afford them, and 2) don't have children out of wedlock.
Is that too old fashioned for you? Fine, just don't complain about the consequences.
Too many young unmarried wopersons of tribal heritage have no idea of what they are getting into with serial sexual activity. The sexual abuse of them of pre-colonisation days runs on now. The State colludes. A bit of hunger and starvation is coming - ready or not.
And about a third of them will grow up to be rotund tubs of lard.
Likely with some form of substance addiction.
Pies, Meth, Gambling take your pick.
But so long as we have colonialism to blame rather than tribalism and the rise in pagan beliefs and superstition the hand outs will continue.
Stats which will suit the Maori elite & bleeding hearts out there - more demands from them for even more $$$$, cultural initiatives and more handouts to arrest the worsening numbers.
What a bloody joke the whole Maorification agenda has been.
What needs to happen? The people need to return to the Christianity that they've rejected. Start looking at benefit rates by religion and let's see which way of life actually works.
No surprise when ACT and National have tanked the economy and scrubbed the nation of jobs. Landlords are doing well though!
I'd love to take up Anon 642 re: religious affiliation and benefit rates. However, the data required are not available. My guess is that people who identify with Far Eastern faiths (esp. Hindu) would have comparatively low benefit rates. This is not because of religion per se but because of cultural factors, especially those related to marriage and the family unit, that are statistically associated with people who identify as Hindus. Religious affiliation often acts as a marker rather than being directly causal in relation to such social issues as welfare dependency. But let's not forget Muslims, to whom solo motherhood is an oxymoron. Perhaps the Sharia is the "way of life [that] actually works"?
Well now I’m concerned about the Christian elite more than I was worried about out the Maori elite. On another thread people were furrowing their brows about the transgender elite.
Anon 905, you said, "Start looking at benefit rates by religion." That would mean compiling tables showing the frequency of benefit dependence relative to population size by religious affiliation. But the welfare agencies do not collate the raw data that would enable us to do that.
What we do know is that "elites" are not welfare dependents - quite the opposite. Are you sure you know what the word 'elite' means?
I don’t think anyone commenting on this blog know what elite means.
We should cap welfare at one child. If you keep breeding then you should pay yourself like normal citizens. Stop these parasites bleeding the coffers dry.
I do hope you are wrong, Anon 1028.........
It would be interesting to do a survey of Pacific Islanders on welfare compared with Maori. Pasifica have a 60-70 % Christian affiliation , while Maori about 27%.. It seems Pasifica do have a lower rate of welfare dependence than Maori but live in quite severe economic deprivation, by being employed in low paid jobs.
Asians and others come from countries where there is no welfare, hence less of a culture of inter generational dependence.
Wise Maori leaders in the past like Apirana Ngata predicted Maori were vulnerable to becoming welfare dependent.
A Christian educator, Mara Collins, who taught in an inner city slum school told her Afro- American students frequently they were to become educated , because welfare was like slavery.
Also, another good idea would be to make it compulsory to name the father, so they have to help financially. If father is in doubt, a compulsory paternity test to be carried out. Yet another stupid Labour policy to let fathers off the financial hook
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.