The Guardian reports:

The latest opinion polls show that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour is facing a general election defeat on the scale of Michael Foot’s 1983 loss to Margaret Thatcher when Labour was reduced to just 209 MPs – its lowest total in the second half of the 20th century. …

Will it happen again this time? Will Theresa May’s snap election enable the Tories to drive into Labour’s heartlands in the Midlands and the north of England in a way not seen since that 1983 Thatcher victory? Will May in the process really be able to “kill off” Labour as the Sun newspaper predicted on Wednesday?

There’s been five polls since the election was called. The Conservatives are averaging 46% and Labour 26%.

Electoral Calculus projects that this would result in 410 seats for the Conservatives and 161 for Labour.

Keith Ng writes:

Winston Peters’ contemptible race-baiting rhetoric has hit a new low, but he’s able to go further than usually thanks to the party that gave us ‘Chinese-sounding names’ having already climbed half way, argues Keith Ng.

You can try to have a sensible debate about immigration – and you can say it’s not about race – but inevitably, someone is going to jump up and say: “Woah, woah, woah, it totally is about Asians, and anyone telling you otherwise are just bloody Asian immigrants!”

And inevitably, that someone is going to be Winston.

But here’s the thing. Immigration has traction as an issue because Labour made it an issue. And Winston can climb out further than he usually does because Labour has already climbed half way.

Labour seems to think that it can open a can of worms, and when the worms start crawling out, it’s not their fault – it’s the worms’. Maybe this would be true if Labour had painstakingly avoided fuelling xenophobia in their discussion of immigration. But they haven’t. They’ve done the exact opposite.

I would remind people that Keith is a former staffer in Helen Clark’s office. So him saying Labour have fuelled xenophobia has more resonance than me saying it.

Yes, it’s possible to have a responsible, non-xenophobic debate about immigration policy – but this ain’t it. Throwing in a bit of “immigrants are taking our jobs” – when the problem is supposed to be infrastructure! – and denigrating those migrants as low-skilled and rorters is the opposite of responsible.

The other key to having a responsible debate about immigration policy is: HAVING. SOME. GODDAMN. POLICY.

Intended or otherwise, Labour has created one hell of a vacuum. They’ve talked up immigration as a problem since last year, and last week they ramped it up to Very Serious Problem which requires cuts in the tens of thousands … but they don’t have any policy.

Little is simply trying to be a mini-Winston.

This isn’t a policy debate – this is a debate about whether an arbitrary number sounds aggressively-yet-responsibly big. Ten thousand? Not big enough! Fifty thousand? Too big!

And, sure, I guess that’s how politics works sometimes. But immigration debates are different. In the absence of actual policy proposals, there is nothing to consider except prejudices and gut feels. That vacuum is an invitation for the worst Winstons of our nature, and that is firmly Labour’s responsibility.

I labelled this the stench of desperation. Labour can’t win on leadership, competence or policies so they resort to what is left.

The Sensible Sentencing Trust has released:

Sensible Sentencing Trust has learned that Afghani sex offender Sultan Ali Abdul Ali Akbari has, since his release on parole at the end of February, been convicted and sentenced to community detention for harassing women at shopping malls. That is bad enough, but of far greater concern, he has had his parole conditions revised for misbehavior with young girls and women at a Henderson swimming complex.

“How on earth can it be that this man was granted a five year reprieve from deportation when he has reoffended, has had his parole conditions tightened, and received a conviction for harassment of women?” said Trust Founder Garth McVicar. “Why was his parole not immediately revoked for breach, rather than simply having further conditions added?” McVicar said.

“Presumably the Immigration Department knew about Akbari’s breach of parole, the subsequent variation to his parole conditions, and his latest conviction, for harassing women. Given those most disturbing circumstances, why on earth was he not deported?” McVicar said.

“If the grant of the reprieve preceded his latest offending, and the complaints of sexual misbehavior made against him, he has now clearly put himself in line for immediate deportation. For unaccountable reasons, Immigration New Zealand said he would not be deported if he did not reoffend within five years. As of 16 March 2017 – a little over a month ago – Akbari had been convicted of harassment of women, and received a community based sentence. That being the case, why is this man still here?” McVicar said.

The more that comes out about this case, the more appalling it looks. The decision maker within Immigration NZ should never ever have agreed to a five year stay on deportation and they must now do everything they can legally to remove this man from New Zealand.

I’ve been sent two reports from the Parole Board about this man. The first is dated 31 January 2017 and some key points:

• Akbari speaks no English
• His indecent assaults were on an eight year old girl, 10 year old girl and 18 year old girl and a female shop assistant
• Akbari has made no progress with rehabilitation and denies any wrongdoing
• Released on 21 February 2017 (sentence was due to end 16 October 2017) with release conditions including a curfew for three months and no unsupervised contacts with under 16 year olds

The second is dated 16 March 2017 and key points are:

• concerns have arisen in relation to his behaviour with children and women in public areas including a swimming complex and shopping mall
• Akbari has been given a pre-charge warning over the swimming complex and given community detention and work over the incidents at shopping malls
• Akbari now required to wear GPS
• Akbari banned from malls, parks and pools

But here is the key thing. He was released in 21 February and by 16 March he had already offended multiple times and been convicted. This should be enough to break the Immigration NZ decision of non deportation as it was contingent on no further offending.

So Immigration NZ must move to immediately deport Akbari. It is obvious that he has no self control if he is reoffending within days of release from prison. He speaks no English so can’t integrate in NZ society easily and he denies any wrong doing.

Stuff reports:

An Invercargill policeman allegedly shot dead his wife, tried to kill the man she was with, then handed himself in at the local station. 

Constable Ben McLean’s alleged Anzac Day attack could be the first of its kind in recent New Zealand history involving a serving police officer. 

Verity Ann McLean died in the shooting. Garry William Duggan, who suffered several gunshot wounds, phoned emergency services at 8.19pm on Tuesday. 

All killings can send a shudder through a community, and especially domestic violence killings. But to have the alleged killer being a serving police officer is even more disturbing. We rely on the Police to keep us safe, and the alleged actions will be a terrible blow to those in Invercargill, as well as all other Police officers.

A reader writes in:

Something you may be interested in, in light of your coverage of the controversy over funding pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in advanced melanoma.

Pembrolizumab has gained Medsafe approval as a first line treatment in advanced non small cell lung cancer:

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11841980

PHARMAC is currently considering a funding application, but there is of course no guarantee this will be successful. 

Would those who campaigned to bypass the normal processes last time around argue that the same thing should happen again? After all, advanced lung cancer has a very poor prognosis, with Maori and Pacific people having especially poor outcomes.

If not, how can favouring one group of patients over another be ethically justified, especially if doing so widens existing health disparities? (Melanoma is one of the very few cancer types where the incidence and fatality rate is much higher in non-Maori than in Maori).

Not only that, pembrolizumab being trialled for a LOT of indications. A quick search for “pembrolizumab” in ClinicalTrials.gov shows trials recruiting for breast, pancreatic, urological, gynocologic, and hepatic cancers among others, as well as myeloma and leukaemia. 

https://clinicaltrials.gov/

How many ‘exceptions’ can be made without blowing out PHARMAC’s budget? And did those who started down this road think about the unintended consequences?

All good points. Both National and Labour politicians should refrain from over-riding Pharmac decision making.

Stuff reports:

A Kapiti Coast District councillor is understood to have been stripped of some powers and is under police investigation after being accused of grabbing a council staffer and pressing himself against her in front of the local mayor.

Councillor David Scott allegedly put his hands on the hips of a female staffer and pressed himself against her from behind at a morning tea at the council’s headquarters in Paraparaumu earlier this month.

The woman was reportedly talking to Kapiti Mayor K Gurunathan when the alleged incident happened. …

But he claimed he would not have touched her “down below” as two weeks before the alleged incident he had undergone surgery to remove cancer from his penis – a very painful process that included a complete circumcision, which left him in intense pain and a desire to avoid contact in that area.

Well that is an original defence – I did not press my penis into that women as I’ve just been circumcised!

Stuff reported:

Westpac economist Satish Ranchhod said while those coming from overseas to live in New Zealand, much of the gain in net migration was actually down to fewer Kiwis moving to live overseas, because of the strong job market here.

“Arrivals only account for half of the strong pick-up in net migration that we have seen since 2012,” Ranchhod said.

“The other half relates to flows of New Zealanders in and out of the country. On an annual basis, this is at the lowest level since 1984. New Zealanders are being encouraged to stay onshore or come back from overseas by our positive economic conditions.”

I thought that this couldn’t be right. That this is the lowest level of net migration (for NZ citizens) since 1984. And it isn’t quite right.

It is actually the lowest level of net migration (for NZ citizens) since 1964!

The data is above. It is for March years. So the lowest level of net migration for NZ citizens since 1964. That is a 53 year record.

The economy can’t be going as disastrously as Labour and Greens keep telling us it is, with so few Kiwis leaving and also a lot returning.

In 2001 we lost 814 NZers a week. In 2008 we lost 658 NZers a week. In 2017 we lost only 26 NZers a week.

UPDATE: Westpac has commented:

I was looking over your comment on migration that mentioned our report(https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/04/kiwis_staying_and_returning_in_record_numbers.html ). I did another check of the numbers. I think the difference between the ones you reported and the ones we commented on was just the frequency. If you look at the March year data, you’re quite right that the low point was much earlier. However, what we did was a rolling 12-month total. Using those rolling annual total shows that the last time the net outflow of New Zealanders was at these levels was February 1984.

So for any 12 month period it is a record going back to 1984. For March years it is a record back to 1964!

Jane Bowron writes:

Spark’s announcement that they are dialling back and unplugging landlines will have many older customers fretting about having to come to grips with the dreaded cellphone.

Oh dear. It is best to write on issues you know something about.

Spark is not unplugging landlines. People with landlines will still have landlines – they will just be on a different type of network.

Stuff reports:

The Government will spend $53 million building a pavilion to promote Kiwi business at the World Expo 2020 in Dubai.

The building of a pavilion in the Expo’s sustainability precinct was announced on Sunday by the Economic Development Minister Simon Bridges and the Trade Minister Todd McClay.

Showcasing New Zealand to the world at the United Arab Emirates’ Expo is crucial to boosting economic growth, Bridges said. …

The seven-month expo begins in October 2020 and is predicted to attract 25 million “high value” visitors from across Europe, the Middle East, North Africa and Asia.

Spending that much money to be at the World Expo may be a good investment. It is quite possible.

But I’d like to know if we have anything more solid to go on that projections. What was the measureable return on investment for Expo 2008 in Spain, Expo 2010 in Shanghai, Expo 2012 in Yeosu and Expo 2015 in Milan?

It seems we are not taking part in Expo 2017 in Kazakhstan? Presumably as not seen as a good investment. So hopefully there is some rigour behind the decision to take part.

Stuff reports:

The Government is creating a new agency as part of efforts to provide more “rigorous and evidence-based” assistance to vulnerable Kiwis.

The Social Investment Agency, to be launched in July, will encourage greater use of data by social sector agencies when making decisions about what sort of support to provide.

Social Investment Minister Amy Adams said the work was about better understanding the needs of vulnerable Kiwis and how government initiatives affected someone across their whole life, not just in one specific area.

“Greater use of data and evidence, and a focus on measuring outcomes, means we can create a system that looks for more opportunities to intervene sooner and more effectively.”

I regard the social investment work as important as the welfare reforms in terms of the potential to improve people’s lives.

Stuff reports:

Erin Moran, best known for playing Joanie Cunningham on Happy Days, has died. She was 56.

Moran’s body was found unresponsive on Saturday afternoon by authorities in the US state of Indiana.

The California-born actress, who also starred in Happy Days spinoff Joanie Loves Chachi, had fallen on hard times in recent years. She was reportedly living out of a motel in Indiana, battling substance abuse.

A sad end.

Happy Days did indeed provide many happy days to my generation. Up until the point it literally jumped the shark, it was great easy viewing.

The Herald reports:

The Government is taking action following a Herald investigation, promising improvement to immigrations standards for those convicted of a criminal offence.

The Herald revealed today that a man who had emigrated to New Zealand had twice been convicted of sex offending since his arrival in 2012, but wouldn’t be deported is his record stayed clean for the next five years.

Sultan Ali Abdul Ali Akbari arrived from Afghanistan in early 2012, and has since sexually assaulted three victims, including two young girls.

Immigration Minister Woodhouse did not comment when first approached by the Herald.

But now he said he would take steps to improve the decision making authority for cases involving residence class visa holders convicted of a criminal offence.

“I have made my expectations very clear when it comes to deportation decisions involving offending of this nature and those expectations are not being met.

“So I am temporarily suspending Immigration NZ’s decision-making authority until I have confidence that the decisions being made are consistent with my expectations.

“This course of action follows today’s New Zealand Herald article regarding an individual whose liability for deportation was suspended, despite the severity of the offending.”

Good to see firm action from the Minister. It was an appalling decision by Immigration NZ not to deport this guy who has already sexually assaulted four women and girls.

Audrey Young writes:

The debate about whether Bill English calls himself a feminist or not looks even more ridiculous this week than it did when he was sworn in as Prime Minister.

Certainly the 55,000 rest home workers and other carers who will receive an extra $2.048 billion over five years in the Government’s first pay equity settlement won’t give a fig what label is attached to him.

Action counts more than words, promises, platitudes or labels.

The extra money in their pay packets, about $100 a week for most full-timers, will transform the lives of these workers who have established that they were low paid because they were women.

It is transforming National’s traditional image as well.

The settlement is the most recent in a series of measures and policy evolution that is seriously challenging Labour’s branding. Yes Labour is still the party that “cares”. But National is the party that “does”.

Not a bad distinction.

Labour claims it will build 100,000 more houses. But the reality is they constantly oppose actual housing developments, have opposed all the RMA changes to make house consenting easier etc etc.

Both of Bill English’s parents ended up in rest homes. His mother was a formidable community activist who helped to form the Farm Works’ Association. Deputy Prime Minister Paula Bennett raised a daughter as a sole parent and worked in a rest home as nurse aid and dishwasher. Health Minister Jonathan Coleman was raised by his widowed mother. He worked as a GP in Otara and regularly attended patients in rest homes and Workplace Relations Minister Michael Woodhouse’s mother was a nurse in Dunedin.

Some people think National today is the same National of the 1970s when almost all MPs came from privileged backgrounds.

As we remember those who died in service, it is worth recalling how massive the death tolls have been in the last 100 years, but also how thankfully they have been much less in later decades.

• 1914 – 1918 WWI – 17 million killed
• 1917 – 1921 Russian Civil War – 6.7 million killed
• 1927 – 1949 Chinese Civil War – 8 million killed
• 1936 – 1939 Spanish Civil War – 700k killed
• 1939 – 1945 WWII – 60 million killed
• 1950 – 1953 Korean War – 1.3 million killed
• 1954 – 1962 Algerian War – 700k killed
• 1955 – 1975 Vietnam War – 1.5 million killed
• 1966 – 1970 Nigerian Civil War – 1.7 million killed
• 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War 300k killed
• 1980 – 1988 Iran-Iraq War – 600k killed
• 1983 – 2005 Second Sudanese Civil War – 1.4 million killed
• 1998 – 2003 Second Congo War – 3.6 million killed
• 1979 – 2000 Afghanistan War – 2.6 million killed
• 2001 – 2013 War on Terror – 600k killed

WWI saw 42% of New Zealand men (of fighting age) serving in the NZ Forces. 103,000 served, 17,000 died and 41,000 were wounded.

I blogged in November on how Labour MP Phil Twyford launch a Twitter attack in One News journalist Andrea Vance for pointing out that their numbers don’t add up on a major policy (unless you substitute four months for six months).

Well Labour continued with their vendetta by lodging a formal complaint with the BSA. This is very rare. It is not at all uncommon that MPs don’t like how the media have covered an issue. Personally accusing the journalist on Twitter of being biased is very rare and lodging a formal complaint is very very unusual.

So what did the independent BSA find. They rejected Labour’s complaints on every count. They found the story was accurate, fair and balanced.  Some extracts:

We do not consider that the item, or the angle taken, resulted in unfairness to the Labour Party, or that a misleading impression was created by Ms Vance in relation to Mr Jasper’s comments on the costing analysis. As outlined in relation to the accuracy standard, based on the information provided to us we are satisfied that Ms Vance accurately and fairly summarised Labour’s position. As Labour omitted from public disclosure assumptions in costing its policy, Ms Vance sought to draw her own conclusions about this. Her comments represented an opinion open to her and one that she was entitled to present in her role as a political reporter.

That is the key thing – they hid their assumptions. They have no one to blame but themselves – but tried to blame Vance instead.

Bill English has announced a minor reshuffle due to the retirements of Murray McCully and Hekia Parata.

• Nikki Kaye becomes Education Minister (from Parata)
• Gerry Brownlee becomes Foreign Minister (from McCully)
• Mark Mitchell becomes Defence Minister (from Brownlee) and moves inside Cabinet
• Nathan Guy becomes Civil Defence Minister (from Brownlee)
• Simon Bridges becomes Leader of the House (from Brownlee)
• Nicky Wagner becomes Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration (from Brownlee)
• Amy Adams takes some house building (from N Smith)
• Tim Macindoe made Minister of Customs and Associate Education and Associate Transport
• Scott Simpson made Minister of Statistics and Associate Environment and Associate Immigration

Looks to be all pretty sensible. Huge kudos to Nikki Kaye for taking on such a huge portfolio at such a relatively youthful age. Also a big vote of confidence in Mark Mitchell in giving him Defence,

Danyl Mclauchlan reviews the NZ Project by Max Harris:

Max Harris’s book The New Zealand Project is an urgent attempt to confront the monumental issues facing our country. It is a bold, unashamedly idealistic vision of what the future of New Zealand could, and should look like. It confronts our deepest problems – political, cultural, social and economic – and proposes radical solutions. It is a book about values: a book about change, and hope, and love, that dares to consider the impossible. I found it conventional and frustrating, and deeply, deeply depressing.

Why?

If you pay more attention to politics, and read online commentary, or go to political conferences, or progressive hui, and listen to more brilliant left-wing intellectuals agree on What Must Be Done, it gradually becomes apparent that the progressive left has the answer to every problem in politics, except for the problem of how to actually persuade voters to listen to them, and thus affect meaningful political change.

Ouch.

All the talk about What Must Be Done starts to feel less like activism and more like a form of fantasy roleplaying, only instead of pretending to be dragon-slayers, or vampires, progressive intellectuals pretend to be people who are relevant to contemporary politics.

Personally I am a fan of fantasy roleplaying. I am currently a Norse warrior fighting Catholics in the 900s.

Civics education is his preferred solution. It comes up in almost every chapter. Schools should teach children to think what Harris wants them to think: that would solve an awful lot of problems.

I think a number of countries have succesfully trialed this method.

But what about reframing politics via the values of care, community and creativity? Won’t politics with those values beat politics without any values every time? Let’s think about this. Harris’s main complaint about New Zealand politics is that it is dominated by neoliberal ideology. In his chapter on social infrastructure he talks about the homeless, and how we need to help them. And I agree. But when Harris challenges his own argument, as he frequently does, he writes about “hearing people on talkback radio” who say that the homeless are there because they’ve made bad choices, so we shouldn’t help them. Harris reminds the reader that one of his cornerstone values is caring, and that politics should be about those values so we should agree with his policy solutions (housing the homeless and “an end to public and political indifference to homelessness”).

But neoliberalism is more sophisticated than angry blokes on talkback radio, and Harris should realise this because he’s written an entire book denouncing it. What a neoliberal economist or politician would say to his argument is: “Yes! We need values! Caring and community must be at the heart of politics and economics. That’s why we need to understand that people respond to incentives, and make choices based on perceived consequences. If you minimise the individual cost of making bad choices by mitigating the consequences and transferring the cost of those choices to the community, more people will make bad choices, and the cost to the community will be much, much greater. By trying to help them you’ll make many more lives worse, because you’ve encouraged more people to make bad choices, and you’ve made the lives of everyone else in the community much worse as well because they’re meeting those higher costs. To truly honour those values of community and care we need to do the opposite of what Harris wants to do.”

One of the reasons Danyl can be such a good analyst if he understands how the other side thinks. He is right that those on the right will also say we want care, community and creativity. We just disagree on how to achieve them.

Now everyone has values and everyone agrees on them and the debate is about the correct policies to support those values. This needs to be litigated, and the neoliberals – or their conservative or populists heirs – will respond with their own arguments and data, which many intelligent and reasonable people will find genuinely more convincing that those of the progressive left. Now we’re in a world in which the left does not occupy the moral high ground because only they have values and everyone else is an idiot or a monster

Too many on the left do believe that they are the only ones with values, and the right are uncaring monsters or idiots.

As a result there’s still an optimistic faith in those circles that the left’s problems aren’t institutional, or intellectual, or cultural, or social, but rather something that can be solved by finding just the right combination of clever words and metaphors to deploy against its foes.

All they need is a left version of Crosby Textor!

Politics is technocratic because modern societies are complex: many things could be better, but almost everything could be much, much worse, and all the high-minded values in the world are worthless if you can’t keep the lights on.

People value an economy that provides them and their families jobs and a decent income. They value hospitals and schools that are safe and trusted. An electricity system that keeps the power on, a communications network that connects them etc.

The Herald reports:

A man who emigrated to New Zealand has been convicted twice for sex offending since his arrival in 2012 – including while on bail – but will not be deported if his record stays clean for the next five years.

The decision by immigration officials has been criticised, particularly as the man did not completing any rehabilitation programmes or offence-related courses in prison.

The Herald can reveal that Sultan Ali Abdul Ali Akbari arrived in New Zealand from Afghanistan in October 2012 on a resident visa.

In February 2013 Akbari indecently assaulted a woman and was convicted.

Then in 2015 he was jailed for two years and one month for five charges of indecent acts on girls aged 8 and 10 and indecently assaulting an 18-year-old.

That offending happened while Akbari was on bail awaiting trial on the 2013 charge.

At sentencing in the Auckland District Court a pre sentence report stated Akbari’s risk of reoffending was “moderate to high”.

The authorities are nuts to let this guy stay in NZ. In Australia he’d already be on the way home. He’s sexually assaulted four women and girls and is at a moderate to high risk of reoffending.

The Herald can reveal Akbari holds a residency visa but has been granted a deportation liability suspension, removing the ability to deport him back to Afghanistan for five years.

Suspensions can only be granted by the Immigration Minister or a “delegated decision maker”.

In this case a senior INZ official granted Akbari’s suspension.

Immigration spokesman Marc Piercey said: “It’s important to note that if this individual reoffends within the five year suspension period he will breach the conditions of his suspension and will be liable for deportation.”

Why let him assault a fifth women? Madness.

“Other factors included family connections and support in New Zealand, as well as the conditions in the relevant home country and the reasons and circumstances which resulted in a grant of residence in this case in the first place.”

Tough. Yes Afghanistan is not a great place to live but he should have thought of that before all his sexual assaults here.

The polls were right – the top two candidates for French President were centrist Emmanuel Macron and National Front leader Marine Le Pen.

From a policy point of view my preferred President would be Francois Fillon but he deservedly got punished for having his wife on the state payroll for over a decade, despite her not doing any actual work.

The top five candidates were:

1. Macron 23.7%
2. Le Pen 21.7%
3. Fillon 19.5%
4. Melenchon (far left) 19.5%
5. Harmon (socialist) 6.2%

The Socialist Party has been one of the two main parties in France. The current President is from that party. To come 5th and only get 6.2% is humiliating.

The polls indicate Macron should beat Le Pen with 60% to 65% of the vote so he will be the first modern President not from either of the two main parties.

Anne Tolley announced:

Social Development Minister Anne Tolley says the number of people receiving a main benefit has continued to fall, with the proportion of the population on a main benefit (9.6 per cent) the lowest it’s been in a March quarter since 1997.

“At the end of the quarter there were 278,236 people on a main benefit, a decrease of 1,655 (0.6 per cent) compared to last year,” says Mrs Tolley.

“Those receiving Sole Parent Support had the largest drop in the last 12 months, falling by 4,175 (6.3 per cent).

“Budget 2015 increased the amount of places for work-focused case management meaning we now have nearly 50,000 sole parents receiving extra advice and guidance. It’s great to see this targeted support is helping more families into independence.

This is excellent news and shows the benefits of welfare reforms.

Over the last six years there are now 53,000 fewer people on a main benefit. That is a drop of 16%.

Those on jobseeker benefits have dropped by 25,000 or 17%.

The huge drop is a 30% reduction in sole parent benefits, by 27,000. We have a wealth of data that children brought up for sustained periods in welfare dependent households have much much more challenging lives.

The level of supported living benefits has only dropped by 1.1% but as that tends to cover people with permanent incapacity, no surprise.

Also pleasing is the number of under 25s on welfare dropped by 28%. Again data shows us that if someone spends time on welfare very young, they are more likely to stay on there for an extended period. Probably or that reason the numbers on welfare for greater than a year has dropped 16% in the last year.

Considering these drops have happened against a rising population, makes then even better news.