Left Further Behind - Child Poverty Action Group

Chapter 3. Work, Families and Poverty
Mike O’Brien, 15 Louise Humpage 16 and Donna Wynd 17
Introduction
Left Behind (2008) concluded by noting that the reforms to social assistance which had been
established to that point:
not only place more of the burden of poverty on the shoulders of the poorest families, but also
fail to acknowledge, let alone address, its underlying causes. The rhetoric around welfare reform,
stripped of its doublespeak, carries a simple message: the only valuable contribution a person
can make to society is an economic one.... As with the costs of global warming, it is time the
debate broadened to consider what sort of future we want for our children and grandchildren....
New Zealand’s welfare reforms are mean spirited, lacked vision, and risk further eroding our
social cohesion. (St John & Wynd, 2008, p. 44)
The arguments expressed then have been reinforced by the developments in welfare provision and
coverage in the three years that have elapsed since that report. Indeed, as this chapter and others
in this volume indicate, that emphasis on work and the associated neglect of children’s needs has
become more strident. The ‘mean spirited’ approach, lacking a constructive and positive vision and
eroding social cohesion have been consolidated and strengthened by subsequent policies, reflected
most recently in the reports from the Government-appointed Welfare Working Group (WWG). The
task of this chapter is to set out those changes and, equally importantly, to locate the changes within
a broader focus on welfare and welfare reform. This is both in terms of the international debates on
welfare and welfare provision and in the light of the evidence around the effects and consequences
of the directions for reform.
Welfare to Work
The current (2008–2011) government’s approach to social
security and income support has been reflected in the Minister
of Social Development and Employment, Paula Bennett’s phrase:
“an unrelenting focus on work”. While undoubtedly containing an
element of political rhetoric, it does capture this Government’s
focus and emphasis as reflected in both the terms of reference
given to the WWG, and the Group’s reports (Welfare Working
Group, 2010a, 2010b). The terms of reference were focused
heavily on reducing benefit ‘dependency’ (and welfare costs) by
moving beneficiaries into paid work wherever possible; making
beneficiaries ‘independent’; and reviewing welfare delivery.
Framed within a very loose terminology of ‘welfare dependency’,
the WWG produced a range of recommendations based around
eight themes. These themes were: a stronger work focus from more people; reciprocal obligations; a
long-term view; committing to targets; improving outcomes for Māori; improving outcomes for children;
a cross-government approach; and more effective delivery (Welfare Working Group, 2011, pp. 1-2).
15 Dr Mike O’Brien is Associate Professor School of Counselling Human Services and Social Work at the University of
Auckland, and Co Convenor of Child Poverty Action Group.
16 Dr Louise Humpage is a lecturer in Sociology at the University of Auckland.
17 Donna Wynd is a researcher and policy analyst for Child Poverty Action Group.
26