Welfare numbers
March 3rd, 2013 at 10:00 am by David FarrarThe HoS reports:
Paula Bennett’s reputation for being tough on beneficiaries is in jeopardy as figures reveal record high numbers on state financial support.
Labour spokeswoman for social development Jacinda Ardern said the highest unemployment numbers were at around 10 per cent in the early 1990s but support for solo parents and invalids have hit record highs during Bennett’s reign as Social Development Minister.
“When it comes to the worst DPB, sickness, and invalid benefit numbers, these have all been since 2010 and under Paula Bennett,” Ardern said. “Interestingly, the two highest figures for the DPB were both after the introduction of Bennett’s welfare reforms, which mostly targeted DPB recipients by increasing their work obligations.”
Ardern provided the Herald on Sunday with figures which showed:
Between January 2009 and January 2012, the number of people on the DPB rose by 13.2 per cent. During the same period, the number of people on the unemployment benefit rose by 82 per cent. “The Government seems to be clamping down on DPB mums in an effort to show ‘action’ to mask their ‘inaction’ in employment and job creation,” Ardern said. “But neither figure will budge unless the core issue of job availability is first addressed.”
The moment I saw this story, I had a fair idea of what the actual data would show. Yes more people on those benefits between those two dates, but not a linear pattern. Of course Jan 2009 was as the GFC was in full force, and hence job losses occurring. Also the comparison stops 12 months ago. Why?
Let’s look at the actual data, in terms of increase or decrease each year. For DPB they are
- 2008 +2,128
- 2009 +9,007
- 2010 +3,576
- 2011 +1,365
- 2012 -5,112
I think we now understand why Jacinda left the 2012 figures off. What I don’t know is why the Herald on Sunday did.
Let’s do the same with Invalid’s Benefit numbers.
- 2008 +3,419
- 2009 +1,537
- 2010 +67
- 2011 -1,062
- 2012 -472
And for those interested in the Unemployment Benefit.
- 2008 +7,760
- 2009 +35,820
- 2010 +756
- 2011 -7,120
- 2012 -6,217
They all show the same thing. The increase in benefit numbers started in 2008 (under Labour) and worsened in 2009 as the Global Financial Crisis struck. Despite patchy economic growth since 2009, benefit numbers in all three categories have fallen in the last two years.
One has to congratulate Jacinda for getting the Herald on Sunday to run an entire story based on selective cherry-picked data. That’s a good achievement for an Opposition MP.
March 3rd, 2013 at 10:13 am
So is Jacinda Ardern arguing that Paula Bennett isn’t hard enough on beneficiaries? As well as using selective data, Ardern seems confused about her position. Again.
March 3rd, 2013 at 10:19 am
But hey look over there!…it’s John Key creating 170 000 jobs.
Nah…just kidding. He’s actually sitting on his hands, lying through his teeth and changing laws to devalue workers and promote moving overseas to find decent work while flogging off the nations assets to pay for shit the fatcat taxes used to cover and blaming a party who hasn’t been in goyernment for 5 years for his own ineptitude.
Pretty good achievement getting the msm to give him a free pass to fool the great unwashed about it too.
March 3rd, 2013 at 10:25 am
One thing we can be sure of is that had labour been in power for the last 5 years, they would have created those 170,000 jobs.
All in kiwi rail.
March 3rd, 2013 at 10:27 am
“One has to congratulate Jacinda for getting the Herald on Sunday to run an entire story based on selective cherry-picked data.”
Not really.
The HOS is just another willing and able left wing propaganda sheet.
Getting them to run this Labour BS would have been as easy as falling off a log.
If I was going to congratulate Jacinda for anything it would be for once again proving she’s a deceitful socialist very casual about truth, and therefore a very suitable successor to her mentor Helen Klark.,
March 3rd, 2013 at 10:42 am
Thanks for noticing. When did the penny drop?
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 10:42 am
Perhaps they thought, the Herald that is, you “don’t look a gift horse in the mouth”.
March 3rd, 2013 at 10:43 am
Id like to see total employment figures comparisions
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 10:46 am
What people like BWAV would like is for John Key to just magic up some jobs out of thin air, as has been done so many times in the past with disastrous results. I suggest he reads about what Prebble encountered when he took over as Minister for SOEs. Then try and track down some episodes of the classic NZ sitcom ‘Gliding On’ which was a brilliant parody of the civil service as it existed in the 1970s.
You can’t look to the Government to create jobs BWAV, (except for the obvious required ones) only to create the conditions for the private sector to create jobs, otherwise you are a loser and your children will be losers as you will indoctrinate them with your loser beliefs.
Who in their right mind would create jobs in New Zealand anyway? The unions have done such a fantastic job over the years increasing demands and expectations that all the low skilled jobs have gone, never to return.
Badmac +1
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 10:54 am
What I would like is for Key to stop talking shit, making promises he can’t deliver on and blaming the other guy when he gets caught out.
March 3rd, 2013 at 11:05 am
That article has also annoyed others at another blog, for different reasons – Welfare is not a pissing contest
Also attacking Ardern for entirely diffeerent reasons – and not noticing the cherry picking but that would theoretically enhance the umbrage.
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 11:30 am
I’d like to see the REAL DPP figures:
From what position did someone come from to get on the DPP: single with kid, or left defacto, or left Marriage.
I think the Marriage figure would be the lowest.
And here’s why I want to know: kids no longer get Married – adults do – the average age for Marriage is about 29 -yet- the average length of a Marriage UNTIL divorce is ONLY 7 years. A complete reversal of when 18 ylds got Married!
In other words – there are some very unthoughtful adults now getting Married!
So a very large proportion of divorces would have young children involved on the divorce bellcurve – and the amount of children involved in divorce would quite likely equal the amount of adults in that bracket.[mum, dad, 2 or more kids.]
Labour spokeswoman for social development Jacinda Ardern will more than likely remind us NEXT WEEK about:
“child poverty” – without again of course, a complete definition and all supporting figures.
The benefits of Marriage I think, at least until the youngest child is 16, should be supported by government – not ignored.
Yes, “I will care and love you forever, and if I change my selfish mind, the taxpayer can then take over.”
Strengthen the Marriage Act you stupid fucks!
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 11:34 am
Damn your black heart Peter George – followed your link, now need disinfecting!
At least the poster acknowledges that there’s some health returning to society and the economy under National
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 11:40 am
“….Welfare’s job, and Bennett’s job, is to take care of the people most vulnerable in society, not to punitively cast them out….”
Crap!
Welfares job is to support them in helping themselves – or as you say in the very next paragraph Pete:
“….as human beings and fellow participants in the shared social fabric….”
‘participating’ in welfare is a misnomer!
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 11:49 am
The unemployment figures up to 2008 looks suspect.
Vote:Did the department start to record the numbers differently after the full of Helengrad.
March 3rd, 2013 at 11:49 am
Kirsty Wynn is a leftwing hack. I wish we could get journalists who actually do some research for themselves before submitting copy-paste articles, like Kirsty Wynn has here.
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 12:23 pm
“I think we now understand why Jacinda left the 2012 figures off. What I don’t know if why the Herald on Sunday did.”
Vote:O come on David – we all know why the HoS didn’t report the whole story – Kirsty Wynn, Kate Shuttleworth, Anna Turner – just Labour Party stooges posing at journalists.
March 3rd, 2013 at 12:30 pm
Do people realize that not just parents with young/er children are collecting the DPB? I know a woman with a Downs child/adult who has been on the DPB forever..I also know of two women who claimed the DPB supposedly so they could look after their sick/elderly mothers..Both women did virtually nothing for their mothers. No one seemed to check on this ”looking after mum story” and a story it certainly was ..One mother chose to go into care because she could not cope and was not getting any ”care” from her so called ”carer”.
Vote:When did this abuse of the DPB start? How common is it? Who monitors the ”care?”
March 3rd, 2013 at 12:54 pm
Joana – are you sure the latter two were on the DPB? There are other benefits which are used for those situations.
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 2:54 pm
Really DPF? Not even a week after your post that read “Rudman confirms media campaign against Government”?
You do a very poor job of feinting bewilderment and confusion. No Oscar nomination for you mate!
Vote:March 3rd, 2013 at 8:38 pm
Thrash Cardiom
Vote:Yes they were/are on the DPB. The second woman is on the DPB now and doing virtually NOTHING for her mother. I have known her mother for quite some time..Others are starting to ask re the ”care.” The DPB was established to help children so I do not understand this use of it.
March 4th, 2013 at 8:32 am
So why are the unemployment numbers so poor?
Vote:March 4th, 2013 at 9:13 am
@David c
Define poor?
Vote: