3. RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) Link to this
to the Minister for Social Development and Employment
What reports has she received regarding the number of families benefiting from Working for Families?
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) Link to this
The Prime Minister and I launched a new evaluation of Working for Families, which shows that 371,000 families received Working for Families tax credits in the last tax year. Working for Families was designed to significantly reduce poverty, and early results show that it is reaching families and is making a difference. Forty-six percent of those families were beneficiaries, and three-quarters of those families had incomes under $50,000. Our Government is committed to continuing to support New Zealand families and we will continue to identify ways to target support at those most in need.
Russell Fairbrother Link to this
What reports has she seen regarding the Government’s progress in reducing the number of families living in poverty?
I have seen, and welcome, a report from the Child Poverty Action Group, which indicates that child poverty in New Zealand is the result of policies implemented by the National Government in the 1990s. The report identifies areas of progress made by this Government, including “substantial reductions in poverty as a result of the Working for Families package”. It also identifies areas where there is still work to do to eliminate child poverty, and our Government is firmly committed to continuing that work. I have seen a number of responses that welcome the focus on child poverty, but there has been a noticeable silence from the National Party—perhaps because it wants to hide its current policy that would freeze benefit rates and refuse emergency support to those in need.
Judith CollinsHow can this Minister be so out of touch with ordinary Kiwis that she can give those sorts of answers, when 80,000 children go to school hungry every single day—and whatever happened to the Agenda for Children and the 2002 pledge to end child poverty?
I am delighted to continue to report to the House on the reduction in the number of children, in New Zealand families, who are living in poverty. That number is estimated to be 130,000 fewer children than when that member’s party was leading the Government.
Sue BradfordWhy does the Government continue to think that Working for Families is working for beneficiary families, when a Ministry of Social Development report, released last weekend, shows that the value of the benefit is even lower now than after the benefit cuts of 1991, and when Working for Families itself continues to offer less support to beneficiaries than it does to those in paid work?
As identified in the answer to the primary question, 46 percent of families who benefited from the Working for Families package were actually families who were on primary benefits. The total package of Government support provided for our poorest families includes not only income support but also helps to reduce essential costs, such as costs of going to the doctor, collecting prescription items that families need if they have been prescribed medication, and also the costs of child care. The 20 free hours’ early childhood education actually adds $4,500 directly into the pockets of our lowest-income families.
Dr Pita SharplesTēnā koe, Madam Speaker. Tēna tātou katoa. How will the Government defend the case being brought by the Child Poverty Action Group to the Human Rights Review Tribunal next month; a case that challenges the Government’s Working for Families package and its discriminatory effects for the families with greatest needs—those families who have been excluded from the minimum family tax credit, and who have been denied the in-work tax credit and who are currently trapped in a non-caring cycle of poverty?
What, if anything, does the Government plan to do to assist beneficiary families and individuals who are trapped in poverty at levels of around 30 to 40 percent of the median equivalised disposable household income—way below the Government’s own poverty lines and as reported by the Ministry of Social Development itself this past weekend?
Our Government is certainly aware of the financial pressure that a number of families are facing at the moment and we will continue to focus our support on those who are in need.
What comfort can the Minister give to the families of the 466 staff of the Ōringi sheep and lamb processing facility near Dannevirke who not only will suffer the negative economic consequences of being laid off but will then face the additional humiliation of having the $60 a week in-work tax credit also taken off them; how would she suggest this additional penalty benefits families who were once working?
I appreciate the sentiments expressed by the member in his question and I know that most members of this House would feel a lot of empathy with those who have lost their job at Ōringi as per the announcement at Dannevirke today. It is my understanding that many of those workers will be offered immediate support by both the Ministry of Social Development and the Department of Labour, and I hope they will not lose their in-work tax credit because they will be able to find jobs. Every support that this Government is able to give those workers to find work—as some of them already have, because it is the off season at the moment at Ōringi—will be given.