Underpaying beneficiaries

Beneficiaries are not getting the support that they are entitled to. NZ is beset by rising poverty, its associated diseases, homelessness, and suicide. I wonder if these facts could possibly be related?

Beneficiary reduction targets, homelessness and suicide

Most people would be shocked to learn that each WINZ case manager is assigned the target of getting a certain number of people off the benefit every month. This is one of the reasons why we have such a punitive and aggressive welfare system. Fewer than half of those removed from the benefit go to jobs. The Nats neither know nor care what happens to the rest, but links to the rising number of homeless and our shocking suicide statistics should be investigated.

Spinning ‘social investment’

Bill English has co-opted the old term “social investment” to replace another old term “targeted welfare”. Simon Wilson (writing at The Spinoff) has bought into the spin and written a deeply confused piece about it.

Hypocrisy and the cost of crime

The Government canned a report on the costs of various kinds of economic crime. RNZ obtained a copy under the OIA, and we can see why the Nats would never have wanted it released…

Vote Key, get Colin

With the latest poll results it’s basically a coin-toss whether a vote for National gets you Colin Craig and his extremist mates at the Cabinet table.

Big Brother comes to Kindy

The Nats used to make a career out of faux “nanny state” hysteria. Now they want to ID number and track beneficiaries’ kids in pre-school. Paul Little warns of “the surveillance state that we are becoming”.

Sick bastards

The Nats resent every cent spent on welfare. They want our consent to keep “culling” people off it as fast as they can. They hope that they can get our consent by re-framing New Zealand’s social safety-net as – quite literally – a dangerous addiction. It is a ludicrous framing, equivalent to blaming the bandage for the wound.

A quick question

Bennett (playing the distraction card) is pushing her drug testing policy again. I have a question for the supporters of this policy which remains unanswered…