November 1, 2016 Indian Newslink Digital Edition

16
Businesslink
NOVEMBER 1, 2016
An inglorious chapter on chi
Alex Penk
“I
know that’s not
PC, but you know,
that’s me,” Police
Minister Judith
Collins said, commenting
on child poverty at a
Police conference.
Green Party Co-Leader Cue
Metiria Turei, who alleged that
Collins was displaying ‘deepest
ignorance’ and making ‘A foolish
statement’ because Collins reportedly
had said that child poverty
is ‘primarily due to a lack of
[parental] responsibility.’
Collins hit back, claiming that
her comments were about the
link between poverty and crime,
and that they had been taken
out of context. And so, the unedifying
debate about child poverty
recorded another inglorious
chapter.
Amid the ‘not-PC’ and ‘you are
ignorant’ and ‘that’s out of context’
posturing, the crucial question
lingers, “Was Collins right?”
Taking in context
Let’s check the context first.
It is possible to interpret
Collins’ comments as referring
to the link between poverty and
crime, rather than the causes of
poverty, when she said that parental
responsibility is a ‘primary
cause.’
If so, then her words were taken
out of context, as she says.
However, her earlier comments
seem pretty clear: “One
of the things when I look at
child poverty, actually I don’t
see just money or monetary
poverty, I see a poverty of ideas,
a poverty of parental responsibility,
a poverty of love, a poverty
of caring.”
So, giving the benefit of the
doubt and setting aside the
question of ‘primary’ effect for
now, do parental actions make a
difference to child poverty?
The truth is that they do play
a part.
Shaping the future
Parents’ actions create a context
for their children that significantly
shapes the children’s
futures.
For example, parents can influence
their children’s future
when they model and transmit
pro-social or anti-social
behaviours and create an environment
that either fosters or
impedes development of cognitive
ability and social and emotional
skills.
Parents also provide resources
for their children, or at least,
they are supposed to do so. Not
all parents do, and not all parents
can, as Collins recognised.
The reasons for this can be
complex and varied, such as
lack of education or poor health.
But it is also true that for a
family in poverty right now,
simply urging parental responsibility
Is not likely to make an
immediate difference to the
situation.
Other factors assume more
short-term importance, like the
adequacy of benefits and the
availability of jobs.
For the sake of clarity, and regardless
of what Collins did or
didn’t say, it should be clear by
now that parental responsibility
matters, but it is one factor
among many.
When we are making generalised
statements about poverty,
none of them can be singled
out as the ‘primary’ factor.
Quality debate needed
We need better quality debate
and discussion about the
pathways in and out of poverty,
and last week’s posturing, sadly,
wasn’t it.
We need to stay focused on
the people. Not by the sort of
petty, ad hominem attack involved
in calling your opponent
‘ignorant’ and ‘foolish,’ but
by remembering that this is a
debate about how to help real
people in real need.
That should be all the motivation
we need to elevate the
conversation.
Alex Penk is Chief Executive
of Maxim Institute based in
Auckland.
GIVE YOURSELF
PEACE OF MIND
WITH AIA
REAL HEALTH
The cost of surgical and medical treatments
availableprivatelyinNew Zealand arerising,
and newcancer treatment medicines are
being developed.
Futureproof your health challenges by
ensuring youhaveaccess to the next
generation of immunotherapy cancer drugs.
$500,000 Limit
Surgical. Medical. Cancer.
REAL Products. REAL Benefits.
Contact your financial adviser or phone 0800 800 242 to
find out howyou canfutureproof your health today.
Terms, conditions and usual, customary and reasonable rules apply. Please referto the policy wordings for full details.
aia.co.nz