Poverty in New Zealand: The New Haves and the Have Nots.

On Tuesday July 29th, Nigel Latta's new series, simply titled Nigel Latta, began.  The first episode focused on poverty, subtitled The New Haves and Have Nots.  The show focused on poverty, inequality, how easy it is to land in the poverty trap, the working poor, trickle down economics, food banks and the despair of being trapped by debt.

The statistics on poverty in New Zealand have escalated over the last six years.  It is estimated that 270,000 children are in poverty in New Zealand.  The meme to the right says that 40% of children living in poverty are from the working poor, meaning that someone in their household is in work but it is not enough to lift their household out of the poverty trap.

We have kids coming to school from damp cold homes, malnourished and poorly dressed.  Often they are left in the care of older siblings or adults who are not their parents as their parents work long hours to put food on the table and pay for the basics in life.  Every now and again a curve ball is thrown at the family, for example a large mechanic's bill when the car fails the warrant or a family member dies in a distant town, so the family borrows from a loan shark at exorbitant interest rates, and the family is sucked further down into the poverty vortex trapped by owing money they can't afford to pay back.

And that makes me angry too.  Because if we are not doing right by these children today, what sort of adults will they grow up to be?  How will they teach their kids about money?  How will they treat us when they are running this country and we are old and dottery and can't look after ourselves?  To me there is a clear opportunity for karma, for what goes around comes around.  So we have to pay attention to this situation.  Now.

And one thing that stood out, while watching this programme, is how poverty becomes inter-generational, how we are handing down poverty from parent to child to grandchild.

During the airing of this show I live tweeted and below is a Storify collection of my tweets and the responses I got, as well as the tweets of others which spoke to me on the night as well.

As I watched this documentary with my parents, it caused a great deal of discussion.  My Mum and I are openly supportive of the left, but my Dad likes to play devil's advocate and claims to be on the right.  But that night, and on many other occasions of late, he said some decidedly left wing statements. 

My Dad is a truck driver.  He starts early in the morning.  He's also driven late into the night at other jobs.  He sees, at times, where the homeless are.  It is a growing problem.

My Mum is a trauma nurse, so she meets people of all socio-economic levels who live in all sorts of situations.  There are times when she has a patient who is homeless, and sometimes their condition means they can not be released from hospital unless they have a safe, warm place to live.  It is a bit hard if your home is under a bridge, in a cardboard box or a car parked up in a different place each night.

As a teacher I see a variety of students who come from different home situations.  I've taught kids who live in wonderfully warm homes with their own room, hot water, no mould issues and with all the mod cons.  These kids come to school having had a good breakfast, have a variety of great food for lunch, and then go home to a flash as dinner at night.  They wear the latest clothes, although I often find they are not always dressed as warmly as they should be. 

Then I've taught children who's family are bunking in with grandparents or at an aunty's house.  I've taught children from families who have too many people for the bedrooms available in the house.  I've taught children who have come from homes with damp and cold issues, black mould, a lack of heating and insulation.  I've taught children who didn't get a proper breakfast that morning, who may have bought a pie on the way to school instead and will eat another (cold) for lunch.  I've taught children who think eating raw noodle from the packet is a nutritious lunch, or who pick a lemon off the tree as they run to bus for lunch.  And I've taught children who have gone home to no nutritious evening meal.  I've taught kids who come to school in ill fitting clothes, clothes with major holes that are worn out.  I've taught kids who come to school with no shoes, no warm clothes on bitterly cold days.  I've taught kids with chronic health problems such as asthma, glue ear, repeated chest or throat infections, school sores.... because of their living conditions and/or lack of access to healthcare.

Most of those kids came from homes where at least one parent was working. 

What does that say about the ability of people to be able to provide the basics for their children?

To me that tells me the following:

• the cost of housing is too high.
• the state of that housing is too low.
• expenses like food, electricity and healthcare are too high.
• people are not earning enough money to house, feed and clothe their kids.

I have taught in a variety of schools, from decile one to ten, and these kids are at all of them.  At the lower end it is the majority of kids in all classes.  At the upper end there are one or two families at least in every class who face these issues.

And I have to say it has gotten worse in the 19 years I have been a teacher, and even more so in the last six years.

National came into government with the catch cry of a Brighter Future.  Well I think they failed the standard on that one.  The only futures which have gotten brighter in my opinion are those who already had a financial advantage and have taken further advantage with National's policies.

Paula Bennett, the Social Development Minister, seems to have some large blinkers on when it comes to poverty.  Being blinded to an issue that is a key part of your portfolio seems somewhat arrogant to me. 

Paula Bennett is the woman who was a solo mother at a young age; took advantage of the housing loan scheme provided by the government of the day to purchase her own home; when being a working mum was too tough went on the DPB; used the training incentive allowance to get her tertiary education (at which time she slagged off that National government for putting her in debt with a student loan); and who then became a National Party MP and the Minister who pulled up the ladder behind her so others could not have the same success as her and then tells us that children slide in and out of poverty on a daily, if not hourly, basis and that she has no statistics on poverty.

And it really doesn't look like National's attitude is changing either.  This is how a growing number of people see John Key and his National led government.  They don't see National as having their best interests at heart or that of the country.

So is New Zealand really ready to do something about it?  What are the alternatives?

This link will take you to the policies which Labour has announced so far.  They have policies addressing housing, health, education, food in schools, employment and more that aim to improve the life of families, children and the wider community.  There are many links to choose from on the page the link above connects to, and all these policies interlink as there is no one solution to poverty.  Each major policy area has its own comprehensive manifesto.  Links to the full manifesto for that area can usually be found at the bottom of the page of the issue you click on.

This link will take you to the policies which the Green party has announced so far.  Their key pivot for addressing child poverty is their Schools as Community Hubs policy, which I have written about in a previous post, Kids at the Heart of Education Nationwide Tour - Hamilton Public Library.

This link will take you to the policies for New Zealand First and what they have announced so far and to their 2014 manifesto which is 101 pages long!  The first of their fifteen principals is to put New Zealanders first and Winston is always adamant that his policies are for all New Zealanders and that those New Zealanders who find themselves in genuine and deserving need are looked after.

FYI: Georgina Beyer, former Labour MP, is standing for Mana in Te Tai Tonga in 2014.

This link will take you to the separate policies of the Mana and Internet parties that have been announced so far.  One of the key kaupapa stated on the Mana website is it "will promote policies that allow all New Zealanders to lead a good life".   And since the Internet Party is such a new entity I believe it is still developing it's core vision, but it seems to be attracting a lot of disaffected voters.  Sadly I missed the Mana Internet roadshow as it travelled through the Waikato.  I would have been interested to go along and hear all the hub hub.

This link will take you to the policies the Maori Party have announced so far.  Essentially their policy hinges on Whanau Ora, which they have enacted through their support for the National led government.  Some may argue that Whanau Ora has been in play and despite it poverty in New Zealand has increased.  I am going to put this argument out there: how much worse would poverty have been if it wasn't for Whanau Ora being put into practice?  I think we can say, without a doubt, that Whanau Ora is not in the full form that Tariana Turia would truly have wanted it to be implemented in; that National and ACT and United Future, as the other partners in government, have all watered it down somewhat.

This link will take you to the policies of United Future which have been announced so far.  Peter Dunne will, in my opinion, be lucky to still be in parliament after 20 September, but I've included his party anyway.  United Future is the party that has almost consistently been in government, having been a coalition partner to both National and Labour since soon after its formation.  Even though it seems less likely that he'd jump into bed with Labour after the 2014 election, Peter Dunn could work with them if it meant he got a ministerial portfolio.

I'm not going to bother putting up links to the other parties.  It's not just that I'm philosophically opposed to the other parties, but I have some clear reasons:

• National - despite it being just under six weeks until election day, National still hasn't released any policy, and Lindsay Tisch (MP for Waikato) told a meeting I was at last Monday that the policies for 2014 were yet to be released.  So I'm not putting in a link to the 2011 policies.  I think National will put most policy out in the last 3-4 weeks before the election, after it has seen everyone else's policy, but then do a whole pile of stuff they did not tell you if they get into government again - just like they did in 2009 (e.g. National Standards and putting up GST) and 2011 (e.g. Charter Schools).
• ACT - they really don't see that there is a poverty issue in New Zealand.  Their philosophy is so orbiting another planet it isn't funny.  I am hoping that Epsom voters do not allow themselves to be led by the nose to vote for David Seymour because he comes across as arrogant and entitled and their leader, Jamie Whyte, has no bloody idea what he's talking about.  Whyte's comments earlier this year in regards to incest as well as his having no idea what Whanau Ora was on Maori TV's  Native Affairs last Monday makes him a laughing stock of politics.  Combined with seeing their Hamilton East candidate, Dr Ron Smith, in action last week, I have come to the conclusion they are all a bunch of loonies.
• Conservatives - I can't take Colin Craig seriously.  Here is a guy that is sinking all his money into his dream of getting into politics, but who has self-sabotaged with his theories of the moon landing and chem trails, not to mention threatening everyone with a law suit/tantrum if he doesn't get his way!!  Yep, another bunch of loonies circling a distant moon.

So that is what you can do election wise.  But what practical measures could you take?

• buy an extra can or dried goods from the supermarket and pop it in those food bank collectors they have at the check outs.
• or deliver some extra goods or a money donation directly to your local food bank.
• volunteer at the homeless shelter to cook for the homeless.
• if you know a family who would struggle to buy clothes, have a clear out of the kids clothes that no longer fit them and drop them off to that family.
• there are some people in various towns that are running their own initiatives to help the homeless or struggling.  Campbell Live has covered some of these groups.
• make a donation to your local school towards the kids whose families can't pay for the extras like camps or visiting performers or to be in a sports team.

And I would recommend that if you haven't watched Nigel Latta's programme on poverty, you really should.  The link is at the top of this post.

When Life Gives You Lemons, Dealing With WINZ Sucks Even More

Sometimes life gives you lemons... things don't go the way you plan... life is hard.

Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, you do not have a job.

In 1930 the first unemployment benefit was established in New Zealand.  The Unemployment Act promised relief payments to those who registered as unemployed and then it followed that there would be no payments made without work, meaning those registered would have to participate in government 'make work' schemes such as building roads and working on farms or in forestry projects.  The Social Security Act of 1938 followed and made it that the benefit was "payable to a person 16 years of age and over who has been in New Zealand for at least 12 months and is unemployed, is capable of and willing to undertake suitable work, and has taken reasonable steps to secure employment".  (Wikipedia - Welfare in New Zealand).  And since then more benefits have been added and many changes have occurred.

You can have all the qualifications and work experience in the world... but you may not be the person for that organisation or another one, and the next thing you know you are unemployed, leaving bills unopened on the table, getting inventive with food (or inviting yourself to other people's places to eat), popping $10 in the petrol tank, scraping together enough to pay the rent so you won't be homeless, scouring the net for jobs to apply for (including those out of the sphere of your qualifications and experiences).

This is the reality many people find themselves in at least once in their lives.  Suddenly the rug is pulled out from under them (they are made redundant, the company goes into liquidation, a contract comes to an end and another doesn't materialise, or you stuff up big time and get the "don't come Monday") and they think "It's ok, I'll find another job, and if I have to I'll go to WINZ for help."

If you haven't been there... count yourself lucky.  It's not a place I want to be ever again... but this was my life twice during 2010.

I had a fixed term position and I had not secured a new position so I knew that my pay was coming to an end, and I reduced expenditure in accordance.... but money only lasts so long, and then it is gone.  For nearly two months I was on the bones of my bum.

It was scary, demoralising, depressing, soul destroying.... and that was before I dealt with WINZ.

Dealing with WINZ I was made to feel the lowest of the low, like filth on the bottom of one's shoe.  Like I was an uneducated lay about who was feckless and without gumption.

I was ridiculed because I did not come to WINZ as soon as I became unemployed  -  I honestly thought I could secure another job, or earn enough as a reliever, the eternal optimist.  I was told to sell possessions, which I refused to do as most of what I owned was second hand already when I got it so it wouldn't yield much, and then it would cost me more to replace them later on.  I was told to move to a cheaper house.  From experience, as I have moved a lot, I can tell you it would have been more expensive for me to move than to stay where I was.  I was told to cancel all my insurances  -  I refused as I reckoned as soon as I did that I'd crash into a brand new BMW, my house would burn down and I would need a major operation - never cancel your insurance!!

The day I went to WINZ I actually opened a power bill to find it was a notice of disconnection.  That sent me into a mad panic.

I had to pull the tears out to the lady at WINZ.  To her credit, she probably deals with a lot of sad cases each day who know all the ways to manipulate the system.  But I was at desperation stage.  I had no money left to pay the next lot of rent.  My power, phone, internet and gas were about to be disconnected.  I couldn't put petrol in my car to drive the 90km back to where I lived (no public transport in a rural district where the townships are isolated from each other by geographical land features of a large size).

Luckily for me though, I had been to a job interview the day before and secured the job.  Unfortunately it would be about six weeks before I started the job (the nature of my profession), and another two and a half weeks after that until I would be paid.

I have found before that having a job to start means WINZ is more likely to help you.  They can see that you are a short term project, that you'll be quickly off the books.  If you are going to stick around for a much longer period of time then they will put as many road blocks in the way to them helping you as they possibly can.

So because I was going to be starting a job, WINZ reluctantly agreed to pay my power and gas bills and a contribution towards my phone and internet bills and the next rent.  No money to get the 90km home though.  And I'd be paying them back these advances (this was to take me about two years to do this, as more was later added to the total during the second time as a 'government employee'). 

I was granted the Unemployment Benefit and an Accommodation allowance.  It all came out at close to $240 per week.  My rent at the time was $300 a week (living in a popular coastal town, that I'd moved to because of my previous position, is expensive) which meant I still had a shortfall.

The position was a fixed term position, with the possibility of extending it... which didn't happen, and again I found myself suddenly without employment.  I went to an interview prior to finishing, but another worthy applicant won that position.

This time I didn't wait as long to visit WINZ.  I was back after my last pay went through.  This time I had to do one of their "job seeker seminars" where they taught me to suck eggs on how to apply for a job.  They showed me the jobs they had available.... they were very few and not where I lived.

But I was no slouch.  I investigated several options.  I had interviews for two very different positions loosely linked to my expertise.... came extraordinarily close to taking one, which would have led me out of the country for a while.... and then a new opportunity came along.  I applied on a Friday, was rung that afternoon to come for an interview on Monday, got the job to start Friday (someone else was in a hurry to leave, and this is a short time frame for my profession).

This brought in new complications for dealing with WINZ.  The job wasn't in the area I lived in, but just over two hours away.  I had accommodation with family close to the job.... but I didn't have the dosh to physically get to the job - I needed petrol in the car. 

I made an emergency appointment with the local WINZ office to sort this out.  I turned up at the appropriate time to find all the staff had gone home sick!!!  This was too much.  I raged at the poor person at the other end of the 0800 number, who then put me onto the main district office 90km away.  I was never going to make it to that office to get it all sorted, so they sent me to the local community centre who gave me petrol money to get to the new job.

That was my 2010 experience. 

This week Paula Bennett, the Minister of Social Development (or whatever they are calling it this year!) introduced changes to the beneficiary system - not just the unemployment benefit, but ALL benefits.

On Monday 15 July, the following came into being:

• the DPB, Unemployment and Sickness Benefits won’t exist.
• Replacing a complex system of seven categories are three main benefits:

            -  Jobseeker Support for those actively seeking and available for work            
            -  Sole Parent Support for sole parents with children under 14 years           
            -  Supported Living Payment for people significantly restricted by sickness, injury or
               disability.

• all beneficiary parents will have to ensure their children:

            -  attend 15 hours a week in ECE from 3-5yrs           
            -  attend school from age five or six           
            -  enrol with a PHO, Integrated Family Health Centre or GP

            -  complete WellChild/Tamariki Ora checks

 

• The changes also require anyone with work expectations to be drug-free, and benefits can now be stopped if people fail to clear outstanding arrest warrants. 
• From October 2012, changes for sole parent beneficiaries introduced expectations to be available for part-time work when their youngest is school-age and full-time work when their youngest turns 14.

Some of these reforms look like good ideas.  I think those with outstanding arrest warrants should not be getting my tax payers dollars, particularly if it is for something more significant that parking fines.  Getting more kids enrolled with a GP for consistent health care and enrolled in early childhood education is great too.  I also agree that it is a good thing to get people back into work for their own self worth as well has for their ability to earn more money and be contributing members of society. 

But here is where I have some problems (like many others):

• Show me the jobs!!!  Those ghost jobs.....  most part time work for solo parents does not fit into school or ECE hours... so then there is the problem of childcare and the expense of it and the safety of it.  Until you address those issues, this is not going to fly.
• Forcing people into work when they have valid health reasons for not working is going to be problematic.  Who makes that decision?  The individual's own GP, or is this going to be like the ACC debacle of the last few years where some contracted doctor reviews the paperwork without meeting the client and declares they are fit for work.  Then what happens if one (or more) of these people goes back to work and they end up in a worse condition as a result, or go postal?  This is going to be a huge problem, and it will blow up in Paula's face if she has not done this properly, which knowing National, it won't have.
• Duh - it's already a legal requirement to have your child enrolled at school by age 6.  That is a dumb one.
• 15 hours of ECE for children of beneficiaries - another problematic issue.  For starters, this takes choice away from the parents.  Is anyone forcing a family with one working parent and one stay at home parent into a minimum number of ECE hours?  What makes that stay at home parent any better at educating a pre-schooler than a stay at home beneficiary parent?  What if there is no appropriate provider in your area where you live?  What if you do not have the transportation to the ECE provider?  And for three year olds, most kindergartens don't offer sessions meeting 15 hours, in fact in some areas you are lucky if you get your child into a kindi before they turn four... and playcentres don't count under this policy... so again the beneficiary parents are denied choice for how their pre-schooler receives their pre-school education.
• Children in ECE last year were given an identification number.  While the article Kindy kids to have ID numbers in the NZ Herald proclaims it is for children of beneficiaries, all children received one on enrolment (or if they were already enrolled).  However this raises questions about how these numbers and the data collected will be used as well as privacy issues.  Will these numbers be used to monitor and dob in beneficiaries?
• While doctors visits for under 5s are supposed to be free, that is not the case in every area.  And children under 5 do not always wait for business hours to need a doctor.  Consequently parents fork out big time when they have to do an out of hours doctors visit.  Just this week a case in Hamilton was highlighted of a parent leaving a doctor's surgery as there was a $35 cost for her ten month old baby to be seen as she was from out of town.  So make ALL consultations free for under 5s even out of normal hours and even when it is not their actual doctor or clinic (provided they are enrolled).
• Not every parent is a fan of vaccinations.  Part of being a parent is making those decisions.  I do not think it right for the state to force the parents of a child into giving them a vaccination that they fundamentally don't agree with.  If that is the parent's choice, then get them to sign a document stating that they made the decision not to vaccinate after researching thoroughly.  Then be it on their heads if something unfortunate happens.
• Drug testing - while I agree that being drugged out on the job is not a good thing I do have an issue with making beneficiaries do a drug test and pay for it themselves.  If you have a history of drug taking, lost a previous job as a result of drug taking, or are applying for a job in an industry that requires a clear drug screen, sure, go for testing them... and in the first two instances, make the beneficiary pay.  But I see this as a slippery slide into all beneficiaries having to pass drug tests to get a benefit very regularly, and if you have no history of taking drugs, then this would be on the nose.  Just because you are a beneficiary does not mean you take drugs.  If I had been asked to do this I would have been highly offended. 
• WINZ says it will continue your benefit  "If you agree to take part in an approved activity for at least six weeks and you are still entitled to your benefit, it will be restarted."  (http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/individuals/benefit-changes/pre-employment-drug-testing.html).  That's great.  But we have a significant lack of drug and alcohol programmes in New Zealand, and the ones we do have are struggling to keep up with demand and gain appropriate funding.  Providers are sounding a warning.

Of course if you don't comply with the changes, your benefit gets cut.  If you are a parent, how do you feed your kids then?  Do these changes really benefit children in the long run?

I was watching a documentary a few weeks ago late at night A Civilised Society.  The synopsis is as follows:

This documentary looks at the new right ideology that transformed public education in the 80s and 90s and the schism it caused with teachers. Interviews with parents, teachers and unionists are cut together with archive footage of treasury officials and politicians advocating that schools be run as businesses. There are vexed board of trustees' meetings, an infamous deal between Avondale College and Pepsi, and teachers take their opposition from the classroom to the streets. The film is the third in Alister Barry's series critical of neo-liberal reform in NZ.

In the fourth segment, from memory, it shows a principal from an Auckland school saying that children were coming to school hungry, the only meal of the day of consequence was what her school was providing that day, and the children would go home to a cup of tea and some bread for dinner that night.

New Zealand has an epidemic of rheumatic fever.  Other western countries have eliminated this disease.  It is rife here.  Why? 

Rheumatic fever primarily affects children between ages 5 and 17 years with only 20% of first-time attacks occurring in adults, and occurs approximately 20 days after strep throat. In up to a third of cases, the underlying strep infection may not have caused any symptoms.  The illness is so named because of its similarity in presentation to rheumatism.  (Wikipedia)

Rheumatic fever in New Zealand has been shown to be predominant within Maori and Pacific Island groups and with poor people.  Over crowding within the home is one significant factor, as is cold and damp homes.  It causes heart problems when left undiagnosed and untreated.

Last November, Professor Norman Sharpe, the medical director of the National Heart Foundation, said, "I feel ashamed, I feel it is intolerable - we have people coming here from overseas, young doctors from the UK and they can't believe we have rheumatic fever. It scarcely exists in the UK."  He praised the Government's sore-throat swabbing programme in schools, which he expected would control rheumatic fever, but it was a "bandaid" and the problem needed to be addressed "upstream" too, by dealing with poverty, overcrowding and poor quality housing.  (NZ Herald 9/11/12)

There is a programme in South Auckland aiming to eradicate rheumatic fever, and even they are surprised by its extent.  Nurses have found higher rates than expected of streptococcal throat infections in a mass South Auckland programme aimed at cutting the high rates of rheumatic fever in the region.  Because overcrowding is a major factor in strep-throat contraction the coalition is also looking to grow the programme so that housing needs are addressed by Whanau Ora workers or Housing New Zealand.  Nurse Lynn Vasquez, 27, works at East Tamaki and Dawson Road Primary Schools. Her work also includes treatment for serious skin infections such as scabies - which have been eradicated from her schools - boils, infected eczema, cellulitis and school sores. Across the region 2404 children have been treated for skin conditions.  "Overcrowding is a massive, massive issue," she says.  (NZ Herald 17/7/13)

And how will these welfare changes improve things for kids like these? Because I predict a rise in rheumatic fever and serious skin infections and other respiratory ailments like asthma (cold, damp and mouldy houses contribute to this) due to these welfare changes, because overcrowding in houses will increase, people won't be able to afford to go to the doctor or pay for their power bills to get heating (thus increasing sickness), and there will be considerable problems arising from a lack of appropriate diet affecting how children perform in schools so therefore a comprehensive food in schools programme is essential.

But what sticks in my craw the most about these changes and the previous changes to the welfare system since November 2008, particularly the ones against solo parents trying to better themselves, is the hypocrite that Paula Bennett truly is.

Credit where credit is due, Paula Bennett has pulled herself up by her bootstraps... but every piece of help provided to her under the beneficiary system has since been scrapped by her.

Is Paula Bennett even human?  Because I see no compassion for children or their parents in any of these policies.

Her track record in how she deals with those who oppose her is on par with her colleagues (in particular Judith Collins reworking events and reports to suit her, Hekia Parata breaching privacy and Anne Tolley being the bully), but to breach the privacy of WINZ clients and bully them is beneath the level of behaviour expected for a Minister of the Crown.  Ms Bennett clearly doesn't see anything wrong with herself breaching privacy of WINZ clients, that she is above the law.  And then to claim that she won't rule out doing it again is to further question how ethical Ms Bennett is.

I contend then that Paula Bennett fails the standard for the following reasons:

• She is a hypocrite - she wouldn't be where she was today if it wasn't for all the programmes she axed in 2009.
• She is clearly not putting children at the centre of her policies, because all these policies will have an adverse affect on children whether she likes it or not.
• These policies will lead to more people being trapped in a cycle of poverty, and consequently poverty related illnesses (e.g. respiratory conditions, lack of nutrition, mental illnesses).
• Paula thinks that families slip in and out of poverty on any given day, so does not recognise that poverty is a huge factor in the current New Zealand society.