NZ Centre for Political Research

This week's poll asks:

Should the DPB be retained, or should it be replaced by a system that provides only temporary support?

*This is perhaps the hardest welfare issue to address reasonably. While it is important that the current system be removed - for the sake of the people receiving the benefit, it remains important that children get cared for. Money alone does not do it. The German system sounds interesting and worthy of research. Brian

*There are some solo mums who are so,thru nofault of their own. The system needs to address these matters. Jane

*A radical overhaul (bring back jenny). Wally

*It's been too easy for too long. Some even make a career out of continually having babies and being paid to do so. Mollie

*This column re the DPB is absolutely spot on. It identifies the real “root cause” of the child abuse, child poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, youth crime etc – ie its the “production” of children. All those other "issues" are simply symptoms of that primal cause. It’s successive Government policies that have encouraged and enabled the least equipped and least able people in our society to have as many children as they want irrespective of their personal circumstances – not because they want a child to love and care for – but often as an ‘easy’ source of income and a Government funded 'lifestyle' that has been perpetuated generation after generation. No Care and No Responsibility - with the Government and taxpayers as the enablers and the families (whanau) as disinterested bystanders. If I have a pet dog - do I expect the Government to pay for its food and upkeep? No! Its my responsibility. If I have a pet cat - do I expect the Government to pay for its food and upkeep? No! Its my responsiblility. If I have a child - do I expect the Governnment to pay for its food and clothing and housing? Why? Isn't that MY responsibility? Colin

*The definition of madness is to 'keep on doing the same thing and expecting a different result.' Bill

*People are going from the dole to the DPB to sickness benefits to the pension without ever working and they think thats fine. Lizette

*Cons and ex cons are being deliberately chosen as sperm donors to extend DPB payments as they can be excluded from contact with their children more easily. This deprives theem from the socialising effect of family responsibility. Max

*Benefit the child by encouraging participation of both parents. Benefit the parents by encourage self reliance instead of being a burden on the state. Chris

*The Germans are more clever than most people give them benefit for! SIMON

*When will Key and Co grow some spine and do what needs doing re welfare? DPB is keeping recipients poor and unmotivated and contributing nothing but problems. Welfare is the scourge of this nation and keeping the country poor. Carolyn

*Change long overdue. Jim

*Put an end to the baby industry. Christopher

*It is doing more harm than good both for kids and their parents. THERESA

*The DPB should be retained to be used where appropriate. Every new benefit should be reviewed after a month or so especially if it becomes obvious that it might become a long term benefit or if the money is not being well managed or is being misspent on drugs etc. In such cases the monetary benefit should be cancelled and help in kind given. for example, the beneficiary should be given a place to live, a clothing allowance and a bag of groceries once a week. Those who cannot or will not manage their money correctly must be removed to a poor house where they will live under military discipline with punishments including imprisonment for disobedience. If they want to bludge off their relatives then that is their business unless the relatives cannot cope or complain to the authorities. K

*How many generations of DPB collectors do we have to have before the system is changed so that men and women become responsible for their actions? Mary

*There is no such thing as child poverty. There in just inadequate parents. Peter

*Definitely only a temporary assistance, except perhaps in a few exceptional circumastances. There seem to be a lot of "boyfriends", who don'treally care for the children, who cause the abuse. Cutting off their gravy train will hopefully make most of them go away, and make it safer for the children. Sheila

*The DPB should only be paid for a maximum of 2 years and then the parent has to support themselves.

What's more, the Government should only provide assistance for the first child - then the parent is on their own. If they want to keep breeding them, then they have to have the funds to feed them.

Unemployment Benefits should only be paid for a maximum of two years as well - meaning the parent cannot go from the DPB to Unemployment benefit.

This gravy train has to stop. It is currently being used as a career choice by so many. Delwyn

*The DPB should be scrap, & make them go get a job. Geoff

*Should have gone long ago. Graeme

*When will the population of NZ wake up to what is really happening and start protesting? Julie

*The present system promotes dependency. The trouble is that all the political parties have locked themselves into the welfare syndrome. Just like Greece, each party is waiting for the other to actually reform the whole system. Neither is there the leadership, nor the willingness to accept that our constant increases in the Welfare budget are curable.
The first step would be to remove the actual transfer of money to those on welfare. Then adopt a non-transferable individual electronic vouchers, for essential items. ie rent,food etc
This control of spending is the only way we can limit financial abuse in Welfare.
The Germanic method is of course the best. But that would mean taking a political decision which would be a disaster at the polls. Brian

*Otherwise it could be paid for the 1st child only. Diana

*It's about time that the DPB was replaced with something that will work...for too long we have become a DPB society ...for too long children have suffered at the hands of ill-equipped parent(s)...we definitely need to deal with the DPB and the issues that arise from it..dependency on the state is not the best policy by any means...I believe its due to the disfunctional families where most children appear to have only one parent and not a balanced family where support comes from the whole family...the number of children who can only expect to sad life is not good enough...parents need to be helped properly and not allowed to use their children as punching bags etc...I hope that something comes out of the green paper but doubt it very much as we are too entrenched in the DPB way of life...its so hard to take away something that is taken for granted..free money!!! Audrey

*It definitely is about time that something was done to deal with these issues: replacing the DPB which has become a way of life for many familiies, and 2: children abuse...is disgraceful that children are brought into this world and can only expect to be abused...I believe this is particularly due to the loss of the "family"...yes a complete family where we all support each other and not use the children as punching bags etc...I hope that something good comes of this but doubt it very much as we are a country so well entrenched in the DPB way of life. Audrey

*DPB has become a career option for the unmotivated young people. Sarah

*It seems to me that DPB subsidises the sperm donors more than the mothers. One unplanned pregnancy per female no matter what age supported by the state & no more, contraception instead. Separating couples counselling & only temp.support. Adoption is no panacea! Monica

*Government benefits are a backstop not a lifestyle choice. Bernie

*Tired of paying for other peoples mistakes after the 1st child it is not a mistake there is enough publicity about birth control. Christine

*The DPB has outlived its useful life and destroyed the future for thousands of children in the process. One can only hope that this current crop of politicians have the wisdom to replace it with a system that protects children instead of harming them. Julie

*The DPB is treated like a cash cow and an excuse to get a job. Yes I realise they are hard ot get BUT most can do something e.g. mow lawns, do houework for oothers take animals for walks if one cannot get one they crave for.
I feel for those that have several children all with different fathers, what a life for these children. It is not that long ago that IF a woman.girl got pregnant and had not parent support it was put up for adoption and said person got on with life learning from ones mistake and most often got married and families arrived into a welcoming home, Marriage is like any business one has to work at it to make it a success. Divorce was not easy to get also there was NO settlement like today either. MARYLIN

*Do not increase the DPB for each new birth - for many women, this becomes state-subsidized prostitution. Ann

*The whole Welfare State is a failed social engineering experiment, not merely the DPB - an outstanding example. Welfare, in general, should be temporary, not a lifestyle & intergenerational choice. Dave

*I like the USA system. 1st child you get full support for a few years and then it gradually gets less. Thus making the parent find part or full time work. 2nd child no payment. Everyone is allowed one mistake. Louise

This week's poll asks:

Should the DPB be retained, or should it be replaced by a system that provides only temporary support?

*It is a totally unfair system especially to hard working parents who stay together. Debbie

*But only when a maximum of two children are involved. Steve

*Present system is being manulated so that solo mothers need not work. Desmond

*I keep on saying it over and over again. The DPB should only be available to married people whose marriages have irretrievably broken down ... after they have explored all avenues of reconciliation, counselling etc. and only after a minimum marriage duration of 5 years.

*End of story. No single mothers. No other accessibility unless the husband/wife dies. Then the remaining spouse needs all the support they can get. Dianna

*Then the Maoris wont be able to get a free load. Graham

*Stop the DPB entirely.
Provide Free contraception.
Give an unmarried pregnant female 3 choices:(a) Keep the baby but there will be no financial support from the government.
(b) Have a free abortion.
(c) Give birth and surrender the baby for adoption.
If the unmarried females of New Zealand have only these choices, the pregnancy rate is bound to drop like a stone and the follow on effects of anti-social, unloved and unwanted children who cause all sorts of problems throughout their lives, will quickly be alleviated. Jayne

*With the lack of an alternative form of support at this stage it would be unwise to take away the certainty that a care-giver needs. However it is time to consider alternatives and debate them thoroughly. Peter

*Some people certainly need help at some time in their lives, but a dependancy on it is not right. Rick

*I think everyone knows this, but 'PC' prevents expression. Keith

*The present system causes child abuse. Barbara

*A visiting dignitary in the 70's was asked what he thought of our welfare system, and he said "if you pay people to have babies, they will" so he saw the writing on the wall back then. Replace????, no, get rid of the DPB. Dayal

*Ideally by the German system. The reason my wife and I are not in poverty is that we produced the amount of children we could afford. This is good for us and for the planet. I resent being taxed to pay for other people's indiscretions sad though it is for the children produced thereby. Low income plus large family equals poverty. Simple as that. Peter

*No debate - the present system is an utter disgrace. Hylton

*Under the current system it is too easy stay on benefits and there is no incentive to get off. Brian

*Go on to the DPB with x number of children, no more money if the recipient chooses to have x+1,2,3... regardless of race, reason, stupidity, etc. Murray

*Temporary assistance ONLY. The DPB has for far too long been a way of life - and will remain so until the Politicians have the guts to change the system! Maurice

*I am in favour of system that encourages and supports married couples (I mean by married, a man and a woman) and discourages career solo parenting. It has been clearly proven that this path of action would promote a stable and prosperous community and country (in time). Neil

*It has devastated our social scene for far too long. Colleen

*Far to many bludging on the system. Ian

*Forcing sole parents into full time work if they want to keep their children is not a recipe for better child rearing outcomes as the US situation shows. The US has higher levels of poverty, crime and other negative social indicators than countries with more effective safety nets. David

This week's poll asks:

Should the DPB be retained, or should it be replaced by a system that provides only temporary support?

*Perhaps lifting the amount of kids a woman can have while on a benefit will help. It's too easy to 'get lost' in the system, fathers can 'get away with it', then the children 'pay the price'. The gummint needs to stop worrying about 'hurting someones feelings', and grow a pair! David

*Simple. Five year maximum for the first birth only. Nothing for subsequent births. When reality of the situation sets in, perhaps young women will be less keen. Nevertheless, I think the German system is a very sensible solution. Might seem hard, but family pressure brought to bear on those responsible is right. Ron

*The following comment came via email from a doctor in UK. Can we actually learn from this?

A doctor told me that a woman in her late 20's came to the hospital today with her 8th pregnancy.
She told the first doctor she saw: "My mum told me that I am the breadwinner for the family." He asked her to explain. She said that she can make babies and babies get money from the State for the family. It goes like this:
The Grandma calls the Department for work and pensions, and states that the unemployed daughter is not capable of caring for all of her kids. DWP agrees, and tells her the children will need to go into foster care.
The Grandma then volunteers to be the foster parent and receives a cheque for £700stg per child each month.
Total yearly income: £58.800, soon to become £67,200 when the 8th one is born, tax-free and nobody has to go to work! In fact, they get more if there is no husband/father/man in the home. The brother does not count.
They also get free dental treatment, free housing, free council tax free school dinners, free tuition fees at college or Uni, free eyecare and glasses, free prescriptions and various other benefits. Total value of all benefits combined are probably approaching £100,000 per annum, which would require an income of around £148.000 before tax to create, about my salary as a senior consultant with years of experience and surgical skills, in a central London teaching hospital.

Indeed, Grandma was correct that her fertile daughter is the ‘breadwinner’ for the family

This is how the liberal politicians spend our taxes. When this generous programme was invented in the '60s, the Great Society architects forgot to craft an end date... and now we are hopelessly overrun with people who vote only for those who will continue to keep them on the dole.....
No wonder our country is broke! Worse, our Muslim brothers have been paying attention, and by mandating that each Muslim family have eleven children, they will soon replace the voting bloc above and can be running this country. Vic

*Sadly we have far too many extra children in DPB households who were only conceived to get extra welfare handouts which all too often finish up on cigarettes, alcohol and drugs. The children become an unwanted nuisance, hence so many starved, battered and even beaten to death by their parents. Many DPB mothers have live-in boyfriends who have a job, a flash car and just happen to be the father of their children. Whilst there are many deserving cases such as a mother widowed when her husband is killed in a car crash, in far too many cases DPB has become just a great big rip-off of hard-earned taxpayers' money. Ron

*Do not give people DPB. Use money to help teach people what to do, including budgeting, learning to make good simple meals, etc. Elsie

*I constantly deal with people I am having to support whether or not I like it. Enough is enough! Laura

*DPB should not become a life-style and should have limitations. George

*BEFORE there is ANY consideration to pay any sort of domestic purposes benefit to single mothers, the mother should be required to provide the personal particulars of the father of the child in each individual case.
No info re who the father is ( so he can be made to face up to his responsibilities) then NO bloody benefit!!!!.
Obviously if someone is in a critical situation (father of child died or totally incapacitated etc) then every bit of help available should be given. How women can get the DPB for several children from several different fathers is beyond my comprehension!!!!! This sort of scamming has to stop!!!! Dave

This week's poll asks:

Should the DPB be retained, or should it be replaced by a system that provides only temporary support?

*We are so overdue for a massive overhaul of this terrible DPB system that it staggers the imagination and defies belief... Peter

*I have always favored a voucher system . Clark

*I feel that the german way is more like nz should follow. Christine

*Wonder why it has taken so long to be restructured. Lack of courageous Govt. perhaps?? Carolyn

*It is time for some action on this. Peter

*There is in my mind no question but that it should be replaced. There are those who look on this as a means of income who are prepared to entice some young man (boy?) so they can get another, thus ruining his life also. Hugh

*But restrict to a maximum of say 2 children per household and limit to a certain child's age e.g. 5 years. David

*Maybe we should again provide for adoption of babies to unmarried mothers. David

*And compulsory birth control for those fully dependant on welfare. Tim

*Your summary was so precise. Parents and granparents of children under 21 should carry the responsibility. Frank

*Drug testing beneficiaries also appeals. Beneficiaries are receiving money that was taken from me and my family! I HAVE A RIGHT TO AN OPINION RE HOW THEY SPEND MY MONEY!!!! Andy

*It could be modified. Men should be more financially responsible, but sending a sole parent back to outside work before school age can't be right. Men who leave automatically having the right to be a half time carer? Not right also. What kind of parent are they? And vice versa where the father might be the better carer. It needs to be case by case to find the right outcome for the child. That prevents later problems, not just moving who pays away from the State. That is my opinion. Deborah

*Before they can receive the DPB the must commit themselves to an educational programe, for future employment, payable by the Govt., in aa specific time frame and once completed (degree & Trade appenticeship) given 6 months further benefit to look for a employment before it ceases. Robert

*Where I live it is unbelievable the amount of young teenage girls pushing prams. How some of these things manage to get pregnant is beyond me, but each to there own i guess. Money should be spent on compolsury contraception in primary schools. Murray

*Benefits should be a help to living...not a way of life. Barbara

*No way should payments be given on an on going basis. Roy

*Time to go.. well overdue. Jeff and Beverley

*ONUS SHOULD BE ON THE RECIPIENT TO JUSTIFY CONTINUENCE FROM TIME TO TIME. Bill

This week's poll asks:

Should the DPB be retained, or should it be replaced by a system that provides only temporary support?

*Both parents should be responsible in the first instance with the DPB as backup. Bruce

*DPB has outlived it's useful life. It should have been replaced years ago when mothers started working as a matter of course. Sally

*National should replace the DPB - they can blame it on the Welfare Working Group that did suggest that it be replaced as part of its recommendations. That would help to reduce the underclass that John Key is committed to reducing. But will they have the guts to do it? That's the question! Nigel

*Enough of paying women to have babies. Make it what it was originally intended to be: short-term, emergency support i.e. on death of a spouse. New Zealand afford the poverty-stricken ex-DPBers who result from a "system" lacking appropriate social goals. New Zealand also cannot afford to support the resultant unproductive "adults" these women produce. Mark

*Current benefit system is easily misused to the detriment of the children. Vivian

*Anyone with a boat will tell you the definition of a boat is a hole in the water you pour money into, the same analogy can be used for our welfare system, until there is enough money pouring in to pay for all the alcohol, drugs and unrestrained procreation, kids will continue to go without, the difference is that the more money poured in (to welfare) without any associated controls on what it can be used for the more money it will need, the "disadvantaged" families being regularly dredged up by current affairs TV pretty much without exception just show families with no self control and an unrealistic sense of entitlement. John

*Scrap it. Tim

*The sentimental moralising of politicians and feminists since the 1970s now shows its evil face. Children need loving, honest protection by all adults equally responsible. Now not sometime soon. James

*Speaking from experience as someone who found myself on the DPB and felt ashamed of having to depend on govt hand-outs although having paid taxes for years. A nasty ex who sent investigators out after hearing I was seeing someone although he was in no position to support me and my son and never did. This forced me to look for work when my son was 1 year old so I did not have to look over my shoulder and could live my life without suspicion. Unfortunately many people abuse this benefit and I feel it should be as a temporary measure, but on a case by case basis. Everyone's situation is different. Liz

*To have and raise children should be a privilege, not an accident. Jo

*I have had 2-3 month stints on the DPB for which I was immensely grateful. It is/should be a temporary help, not a lifestyle choice. Jo

*Get rid of it and follow Germany's example. Mary

*The difference between N Z and the other countries which you mention is that they don't have an infliencial, vocal and pandered to ethnic minority whose suggest that one of their early relatives pulled this country out of the sea with a bloody great big hook. I suggest that reform would be acceptable and accepted by others but we will never get Maori to go along with it. It is part of their gravy train. I haven't found any statistics on Asian families and their attitudes. We have few Americans, germans etc living in NZ and yet the article sems to concetrate on Maori versus the rest. Mike

This week's poll asks:

Should the DPB be retained, or should it be replaced by a system that provides only temporary support?

*The DPB should have been abolished years ago. Single parents should get 6 months support then they should go on the dole. People should not have children unless they are in a position to properly provide for them. Peter

*I suspect that much of the family violence is caused because many kids are not properly socialised through having a good relationship with their father. That the politicians have known what is going on but turned a blind eye is disgraceful. Someone should sue them with a class action then watch how quickly the law is changed. Irene

*All welfare support should be temporary - except for people who are disabled. Prue

*Yes, yes, yes - why should taxpayers have to pay to raise other people's kids? It's gone on for far too long! Mike

*The DPB should be the priority for reform if the government is serious about stopping child abuse. It is fair to provide temporary support but NOT long term support. James