LINDSAY MITCHELL: Outgoing Children's Commissioner calls for bigger benefits as swansong
- Administrator
- Aug 2
- 2 min read
Outgoing Children's Commissioner calls for bigger benefits as swansong.
Today on Q&A outgoing Children's Commissioner Claire Achmad told Jack Tame the idea that work alone will lift children out of poverty is a "fallacy".
Yet the US evidence says the opposite.
NZ has a very high rate of sole parent benefit dependency. So did the US. The two countries share the same family breakdown of African Americans and Maori. The Maori ex-nuptial birthrate is currently 81 percent and Maori make-up 51 percent of sole parent beneficiaries (with a recorded ethnicity).
Under a Democratic administration the US reformed its welfare benefit for families (not specifically but frequently headed by a single parent) in 1996. AFDC - Aid to Families with Dependent Children - became TANF - Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Time limits and work requirements were introduced.
Here's what happened:
Returning to the Children's Commissioner.
Achmad wants both wages and benefits to increase. But what about the gap needed between them to incentivise work?
And has she chosen to ignore NZ research that shows children in poor families whose source of income comes from the market, fare much better than children in poor families whose income comes from the government?
"To summarise, the findings show that poor children reliant on government transfers, when compared with poor children reliant on market incomes, have lower living standards and a number of compounding shortfalls that can be expected to place them at greater risk of negative outcomes."
Claire Achmad has no understanding of behavioural economics. Or any other kind of economics.
She sat with Jack Tame on Q & A today talking like a clone of Jacinda Ardern. The similarity of their ill-informed ideas, expression thereof and mannerisms was astounding.
Of course her appointment couldn't be extended. Her advocacy is thoroughly misguided and to that extent, would only ever worsen children's life chances in general.
Perhaps her recent vacuous virtue-signaling campaign should serve to illustrate just how badly she needed to go. Her petition Dear Children gathered, after seven months, the grand total of 4,385 signatures. Not even her fellow travelers were roused.
Just thought I would point out a major contributing factor to the downfall of the Roman empire was "social welfare" who some historians claim was invented by them, (veneral disease and homosexuality was pretty rife as well) we are heading the same way.
Do we have any bureaucrats who have visited, let alone live on, planet Earth?
Achmad is an empty vessel who should never have been appointed to the Childrens Commissioner role in the first instance...she has added nothing to the imporovement in children's wellbeing....a relic of the last Ardern ideological government with kindness as their only tool....and no policy other than financial handouts.
There was a time when government support for solo mothers was justified by the purported benefits to children of enabling their mothers to remain in the home. Alas, the data do not bear this reasoning out: in practice, the exact opposite would appear to be true! Time to assess, clearly & honestly, some of the unintended consequences of government welfare policy.
A very clear analysis Lindsay leading to very clear outcome.
As a nation we need to get to the root coause of the malaise. Yes, liberal white women are the current conduit but if we can remove the flood of "needy" things may improve.
How many on this blog have lived a life on welfare? My guess is none although Ian (One drum) Boag will pop up at some stage and remind us that superannuation is welfare. How many on this blog ended their working life with themselves and their kids living a life that they could only imagine in their youth?
What has changed? Yes welfare is more accessible yet few on this blog or their children are choosin…