|
|
|
|
| No.190 | 8 August 2003 | Essential Information on an Essential Issue |
Jolt (noun) a sudden shock
 " This Government came to office with a great deal of scorn for the idea that recipients of the unemployment benefit should be required to look for work and accept any reasonable offer, which is what is usually meant by the term "work test". It carries the clear implication that those who fail the test will lose some or all of their welfare payment, although not even the previous Government imposed that sanction. Nevertheless, Labour came to power excoriating the supposed "meanness" of the previous regime and engineered the departure of its leading symbol, Christine Rankin, chief executive of Work and Income NZ, which was to undergo a "culture change". Evidently, that is all history now, for a set of initiatives announced by the Minister of Social Welfare, Steve Maharey, this week look not too different from the carrots and sticks that he used to criticise..." — editorial in The New Zealand Herald 6 August 2003, "Carrot and stick for the jobless"
 " This is one shrewd Government. Cabinet's so-called "Job Jolt" plan suggests that Labour's in-house polling is saying that the electorate perceives this Government, and the minister in particular, as soft on welfare. No more, it seems... " Making the kind of swinging attack on life-long welfare that Mr Maharey, with Prime Minister Helen Clark, did on Monday is what voters traditionally expect of National or ACT NZ. But NZ Labour, like New Labour in Britain, knows that their belief in welfare as a safety net has become, in the minds of many, welfare as a hammock. " This week's Jobs Jolt measures might not go as far as political opponents would prefer, but they might nonetheless go far enough to settle the average Kiwi battler, who struggles to make ends meet and deeply resents "welfare bludgers". If so, the Government can add this to its growing list of successes _ reducing welfare dependency is a fraught field for any left-of-centre government. " — editorial in The Dominion Post 6 August 2003, "Jobs plan a jolt for opposition"
 " The 10-point plan with its $104 million price tag seemed a dramatic new effort to tackle unemployment. Closer scrutiny suggests, however, that this so-called jolt to the dole queue has been over-sold. " The package attracted predictable publicity which suggested that those on the dole were due for some beneficiary bashing ... Actually, apart from work testing for the older unemployed, such measures expanded or clarified existing rules. " That does not affect the merits or otherwise of the measures themselves. It does, however, raise the issue of why the Government presented a package that so easily lent itself to accusations of beneficiary bashing. Even more curious is that as recently as May the Government was denying that it planned to work test the older unemployment beneficiaries. The suspicion arises that this package is a response to a perceived public dissatisfaction with the level of welfare dependency and perhaps to impending jobless figures ..." — editorial in The Christchurch Press 6 August 2003, "Oversold package"
 " What comes first, the job or the shift? It is doubtful even Steve Maharey knows the answer. The Government's Job Jolt scheme announced this week has given everyone in the employment industry a jolt. No one knew it was being prepared by this proudly consultative Government. It reeks of being cobbled together in a rushed attempt to be seen to be doing something in the area of benefits, where it is vulnerable to any party or voter on its right." — editorial in The Daily News 7 August 2003, "Maharey jobs-hunt scheme looks more like a noise-hunt"
 " The Government's new push to get beneficiaries off the dole and into jobs is common sense. Nobody should expect to live at the taxpayers' expense if they are able to work and a suitable job is available. The so-called Jobs Jolt simply sets out a plan to better achieve that. However, the reality is sometimes different from the plan ... " What the Government's employment package does not address is an assurance that a job will pay a decent wage. For many workers it is not too difficult picking up a job. The problem is that many jobs are casual and not fulltime. It is an increasing trend to have to juggle more than one part time job to earn a living. It is one thing to get more people off the dole, but a bigger challenge to ensure jobs pay well. The dole will seem less attractive if there is good money to be made working." — editorial in Marlborough Express 6 August 2003, "Good in theory"
 " No matter what the spin — and there was plenty of that — the Government's latest assault on the country's dole queues contains elements which are, as some critics have already pointed out, harsh and punitive. For there is an iron fist in the velvet glove of the "offers" Employment Minister Steve Maharey says the state is putting up. It is the ultimate sanction of no work, no money. If you don't see things our way — don't leave town, for example — we will cut you off. It's draconian stuff, sure to appeal to those who think you must be too lazy to work if you are unemployed ... " Of course, there are always some who abuse the welfare net, and presumably they are in for some "enhanced" attention from agencies such as Work and Income. But take the case of the older worker, made redundant, and who can't get another job because he or she is told they're over-age, despite having all the skills in the world. What's the Government doing about employers who freely and openly indulge in age discrimination? It can help with retraining, where that is needed. But there are plenty of reasons why people are declared surplus which have nothing to do with their skills, and therefore for whom retraining is not relevant ... " The legendary Gisborne surfie who over the years has fought off all attempts to get him into work may well exist, if not in the rumoured widespread numbers. Nobody will be too upset if his carefree days are brought to an end by tougher state policies. After all, those are our taxes that are paying for his benefit. But it would be wrong to generalise from the particular. Most people are not work-shy. Quite the contrary — they desperately want to work, and the last thing they need is some state-sharpened axe dangled over their head. " — editorial in Manawatu Standard 6 August 2003, "Iron fist in the velvet glove"
 " Wow. Where did that come from? Labour's "Job Jolt" package wasn't simply announced on Monday, it was dumped from on high. No warning. We didn't even know it was the issue of the day. That's because it isn't. " There is every reason to be suspicious of Labour's motivation for supposedly getting tough on beneficiaries now, and the statement from Social Services Minister Steve Maharey of waiting until the labour market was robust enough doesn't quite cut it. After all, this Government already has initiatives in place. Now this, a $105-million jolt. We're not only suspicious, we're confused. " And these measures certainly sound tough, especially coming from a party of the left. Work testing for beneficiaries aged 55 to 59; requiring unemployed people to shift towns to get work; cutting off benefits to those who are deemed free loaders. But the extension in age testing is really the only thing new here. People's benefits can be cut off now. They can be made to shift now. " So, maybe not new initiatives, but does Job Jolt mean this Government wants more use to be made of existing ones? Does it want the 10-year unemployed person with a drug dependency to be cast free? To what, a life of crime? And uproot the family from school and support networks for a job for one of them, and no guarantees on how long it will last? Or is this simply political posturing, off the back of Labour's own polling, as suggested by National? " — editorial in The Timaru Herald 6 August 2003 "Job plan a jolt"
LAST Letter
NEXT Letter  Download this issue as a PDF file
Index to Features
|
 |
 The government has unveiled a $104.5 million jobs package which it says will tackle skill
shortages and get more New Zealanders off benefits and into work. The package contains ten
initiatives, which the government is collectively marketing as the "Jobs Jolt".
The announcement has indeed come as a sudden shock to many beneficiaries ... but even opposition parties have been caught completely off-guard, and community groups say they have been "ambushed" by these announcements. There has been widespread criticism that this "tough love" package is a political ploy to cut the ground from under right-wing political parties who had recently been gaining electoral credibility on welfare issues. And the style of parts of the latest announcements seem more reminiscent of the punitive measures undertaken by former Winz boss Christine Rankin ... rather than the "social development" policy focus that has been promoted up until now by Minister Steve Maharey. — threaten to cut benefits for jobless people who move to remote areas with little prospects for paid work. — require unemployed people aged 55-59 to be active and available for work. — make those who lose potential jobs through a positive drugs test undergo drug and alcohol education. — contract intensive specialists to focus one-on-one with those people who have been without work for eight or more years. — intensify employment programmes for solo parents — link industries with labour and skill shortages, while giving training to long-term joblessness. — introduce employment coaching for skilled and work-ready jobless people. — put a greater Winz presence in eight remote areas, in order to promote better links between local job seekers and employers. Maharey expects that most of these initiatives will pay for themselves ... as the government will recover as much as $91 million in reduced benefit payments. Source — Press release Steve Maharey 4 August 2003 "Jobs Jolt will get more New Zealanders into work"Green MP Sue Bradford, herself a former beneficiaries advocate, remarked in Parliament, last Thursday: "Since it came to power, Labour has made a justifiably big deal about its willingness to consult with community groups about the issues which affect them and the people they serve. After 4 years of an NGO/government consultation process, of regular meetings between MSD and beneficiary groups, and between the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs and public officials, all that nice talk has been rendered meaningless by Maharey's latest effort..." Support for the Mayors Taskforce is one of the ten elements of the "Jobs Jolt" package, with the establishment of a $500,000 annual "Flexible Employment Fund" which will be money that the Winz Regional Commissioners can call on to develop initiatives in co-operation with Taskforce Mayors. But this latest announcement actually makes funding for the Mayors less flexible than before. The money replaces an existing Mayors Taskforce allocation in the "Transition to Work Contestable Fund" (which ended in June this year). The "Jobs Jolt" money will now be more closely tied to the government's "Youth Transitions Strategy" which is aligned with the government's goal of ensuring work and training options are available for 15-19 year olds. South Waikato Mayor Gordon Blake says the government should invest in business development in smaller regions rather than push people to move. His district has seen job losses in recent years in the forestry industry. Blake: "We have a good infrastructure here already, help us to use it..." The "Jobs Jolt" package, however, has been applauded by Otorohanga Mayor Eric Tait, who says Otorohanga is desperate for labourers and semi-skilled workers. Tait: "I think it's about time the Government got hard." In the Hauraki district, Mayor Basil Morrison doubts Maharey's announcement would have much effect. Morrison: "We are not in an out-of-the-way area. Job opportunities in our district are still pretty good. We have more of a problem with people looking for employees..."
COMMENTS ON THE "JOBS JOLT" PACKAGE National Party MP Katherine Rich says the "Jobs Jolt" is an acknowledgement of her
own party's concerns. Rich: "Steve Maharey's trying to pretend he's taking a tougher line, when all
he's doing is acknowledging National's concerns that there are far too many people trapped on
welfare. Treasury projections show that welfare numbers are going to increase significantly over the next
few years. Nothing is this package is going to allay community concerns that too many people are
struggling on welfare ..."
Rich describes the package as a "waffle fest" that is short on detail and lacks commitment to delivering results. She points to what she calls woolly and undefined aspects of the programmes that lack bite: "The government pretends to take a tougher line but stops half way with comments like "clarification for clients" who fail drug test — what does that mean? Do they keep getting a benefit or not? It says Invalid and Sickness Beneficiaries will be assisted to retain links with the workforce "if they wish to" — if they are able to work they should be expected to try for jobs." Source — Press release national Party 5 August 2003; "Jobs announcement weak waffle"; Press release national Party 5 August 2003 "Jobs Joke of 10 "not so new" programmes"
 Act MP Muriel Newman sees the "Jobs Jolt" as an attempt to pre-empt the inevitable
criticism Maharey will get from the rise in unemployment which is expected in the next Household Labour
Force Survey. Newman: "True to form, Mr Maharey is attempting to distract attention from the
negative unemployment statistics. Recent information that shows that the number of people who have
been registered unemployed over four years has risen 61 percent — to more than 17,000 — since he
became Minister. Equally alarming, the number of Sickness Beneficiaries has breached 40,000 for the
first time in New Zealand history. The Minister has single-handedly reversed declining Sickness
Benefit numbers by removing it from the Community Wage, making it a standalone benefit once again."
Source — Press release Act Party 5 August 2003 "Maharey's chickens home to roost" by Muriel Newman
 Green Party MP Sue Bradford believes the "Jobs Jolt" has brought a screeching halt to four
years of the government "boasting about their achievements for ordinary workers and low-income
people". Bradford calls the policy announcements "a massive lurch to the right" which unfairly blames and
punishes beneficiaries. She accuses Maharey of pandering to right-wing parties, all of whom have had
rising profiles this year with their welfare policies.
Bradford: "I'm beginning to ask myself whether Steve Maharey and Peter Hughes are driving Labour's welfare reforms, or whether the real drivers are the ghosts of Jenny Shipley and Christine Rankin, as personified in 2003 by Katherine Rich, Don Brash and Muriel Newman." "Mature aged people are one of the most highly motivated and at the same time one of the most disadvantaged groups of unemployed people. I don't think that the Minister can begin to comprehend the humiliation involved, nor the anxiety of people who are plunged into despair at this attack on their dignity and self-esteem at a stage of their lives when society owes them a lot more than sanctions and punishment for daring to be out of work through no fault of their own ..." Source — Press release Green Party 5 August 2003 "Labour's lurch to the right on benefits alarming"
He warns there must be some leniency when considering suspending a person's benefit if they refuse to move to an area where there is a job for them: "Where people are mobile, I think it's an excellent idea. For them to stay in areas where there are no jobs, and expect everybody else to support them … I don't think society owes them that opportunity." Source — New Zealand Herald 5 August 2003 "Employers praise govt's jobs jolt" by Paula Oliver
 The Council of Trade Unions believes the "Jobs Jolt" initiatives for sole parent beneficiaries
will only work if it actively supports people into real sustainable work, rather than penalising those
on benefits. Secretary Carol Beaumont says the enhanced case management of sole parents must
not operate as a work-test which fails to recognise the valuable unpaid caring work done by sole
parents. Beaumont: "It also needs to take into account their concentration in low-paid, casual work, and
the need for better family-friendly workplaces and childcare."
Source — Press release NZ Council of Trade Unions 4 August 2003 "'Jolt' must deliver real jobs"
Hackwell also says that the intention to make beneficiaries shift to bigger towns in order to find work did not make sense as many had moved to remote areas to escape poverty. He believes that if Winz paid beneficiaries their correct entitlements, many would not have to move to remote areas in search of a cheaper lifestyle. Source — The Dominion Post 5 August 2003 "Jobs Jolt nothing new say advocacy groups" by Leanne Bell
NO-GO ... OR NO DOLESingle beneficiaries get $165.65 a week on the dole, and married couples without children get $269.40. They may be eligible for extra assistance, including the accommodation supplement if they live in qualifying urban areas. The initiative seems to be aimed at beneficiaries who have moved to areas where housing is cheap, even though jobs are scarce, in the face of rising living costs in cities. Minister Steve Maharey says that while moving to rural areas might make for a cheaper lifestyle for some beneficiaries, they can only sustain this because they are depending on the State to support them. Given there are labour shortages elsewhere in the country, Maharey says the government expects more of these people: "If a person has said time and time again "I want a job here in this hamlet where I live with five other people and I want to be a brain surgeon" then we're going to say no ..." Bradford: "Unemployed and beneficiary groups around Aotearoa fought a long hard battle in the early to mid 80s to get recognition of the injustice shown particularly to Maori people returning to their home districts and then being denied the unemployment benefit. After a long struggle which included, memorably, the first occupation of the Kaitaia Social Welfare Department in 1985, the Remote Areas clause was overturned. It is now pitiful that a Labour Minister in a government supposedly more sympathetic than their 1980s predecessors sees fit to turn back this particular clock." Source — The Dominion Post 6 August 2003 "No-go areas planned for the unemployed" by Tracy Watkins; Speech to Parliament 6 August 2003 Sue Bradford "Work and Income — Employment /Unemployment"
WORK TESTING FOR PEOPLE 55 — 59 YEARSWinz says that older workers are now in demand and that it is important to keep them in the workforce. Auckland regional commissioner Barry Fisk says that when the 55 years exemption was put in place, the retirement age was 60 years. With the retirement age now at 65 years, it makes sense to push back the work testing age as well. Taylor: "Mr Maharey's announcement of the decision to move to more active case management of older workers to enable increased support and job focused assistance is a step in the right direction. However it is disappointing to see the low priority that has been placed on undertaking work with employers to promote the benefits of hiring older job seekers. By focusing on the personal skills of the job seeker, without an equal focus on shifting the ageist attitudes of employers, Mr Maharey is sending all the wrong signals and their attempt at supporting positive ageing is doomed to fail. " Roger Tweedy of the Work and Age Trust agrees. He says attitudes still need changing, especially among employers who "wrote off" the years of service left in mature staff while complaining that younger workers never stayed long enough. Garth Taylor has a suggestion: "Perhaps there is an opportunity for Work and Income to employ some of those older, long term unemployed as case managers who will fully understand the discrimination in the workplace that is faced by those over the age of 55? This would fulfil part of government's stated actions in the Positive Ageing Strategy ..." Source — New Zealand Herald 6 August 2003 "Mature workers coveted say officials" by Mathew Dearnaley; NZOOM.COM 4 August 2003 ""Jobs Jolt" to hit older workers" from TVNZ One News; Press Release Age Concern 6 August 2003 "Older Workers Case Management" by Garth Taylor
VOICES
|
