Bradford warning on welfare change

A return to tough 1990s welfare reform is feared as the Government presses the need to change the welfare system.

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett confirmed yesterday that the Government believes it "needs to do more" to tackle perceived problems with the welfare state identified in a working party report.

The report, published yesterday, said the welfare system was "unsustainable, outdated and fragmented" and would eventually cost the country $50 billion.

The Government set up the working party after announcing a first tranche of welfare changes in March.

The legislation enacting those changes will be passed by Parliament next week and will take effect from the end of next month.

But Ms Bennett said yesterday that they were only the start.

"We need to do more. This is why we asked a group of experts to canvass the issues and provide the Government recommendations to consider later in the year."

From September 27, the first changes will introduce part-time work obligations for solo parents on the domestic purposes benefit whose children are aged over six.

Ms Bennett said this was already a significant change, but "I'm open to any changes that could support people better into work and to remain independent".

Most of the report's findings came as no surprise to the Government, she said. "And it certainly reaffirms the need to reform the welfare system."

Prime Minister John Key said the initial changes fulfilled election promises.

"But the issue of long-term welfare dependency also needs to be looked at."

Welfare advocate and former Green Party MP Sue Bradford said the impact of changes was already being felt by beneficiaries, with "much more intense harassment" of them.

The direction in which the working group was headed could have even greater implications, she said.

"If they go the whole way that [working group chairwoman] Paula Rebstock is heading in, the reform would be far more significant than what National did in the 1990s, because it would change the whole basis of our social security system."

The focus on getting sickness and invalid beneficiaries working was misplaced, she said.

"Should the Government's priority be on forcing people who are sick, injured or disabled out to work when it's very difficult for them, or should it be on the 160,000 unemployed and helping them to get jobs?"

Although work was often good for people, it was not always for the best.

A solo mother, for instance, might be pushed into a night job stacking shelves at a supermarket.

"That's the sort of work that's not going to get her anywhere and that makes her feel worse about herself, often because she's having to do it at unsociable hours on low pay and often at the mercy of employers who demand different shifts."

Labour leader Phil Goff said detailed policy changes to work incentives had a substantial effect only when benefit numbers were low.

"How the hell are you going to get people off the benefit and into the workforce if every one of those jobs is being snapped up as soon as it's advertised?"

Last week in Nelson, 115 people had lined up to apply for 20 jobs at a KFC outlet, he said.

"There are people out there desperate to work. What we're lacking are the jobs to get them into."