|
Skip
to this weeks poll |
Send to friend
16
August 2011
Mending
a broken society
|
Printer
friendly version (PDF)
View
>>>
|
There
are no excuses for the rioting and hooliganism that took place
in Britain in recent weeks. It was criminal and cowardly
behaviour – the worst form of opportunism by (mostly) young
delinquents. That the government has made a commitment to the
British public that the rioters will face the full force of
the law is as it should be. The tragedy is that the initial
response to the crisis by the Police was so inadequate that
rampaging mobs were able to create widespread mayhem and
death.
What is
particularly unfortunate is that the potential for such a
breakdown of civilised behaviour in Britain had been well
recognised. Just last month, the UK Secretary of State for
Work and Pensions and this week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator,
the Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith, was in New Zealand at the
invitation of the Maxim Institute to outline his
government’s plans for curbing social breakdown. He
explained that Britain was in the grip of a “culture of
recklessness and irresponsibility” caused by the welfare
system:
“This
culture of recklessness has contributed to the deprivation and
breakdown we see across swathes of our society today. Pockets
of worklessness and dependency, often persisting through
generations of the same family. More than 4 million people on
out of work benefits, many for 10 years or more. One of the
highest levels of unsecured personal debt in Western Europe.
The highest teenage pregnancy rates in Western Europe. Over a
million children growing up in households with parents who are
addicted to drugs or alcohol. And the worst thing of all: this
was before the recession had even started. We had an
entrenched culture of social breakdown even while the economy
was growing.” You can read the full speech here
>>>.
Britain’s
riots are a consequence of the abject failure of the welfare
state. For decades, social welfare had incentivised the
breakdown of the family, driving fathers out of their homes
and creating dysfunction on a massive scale. This toxic mix of
unconditional welfare and intergenerational dependency had
spawned a dangerous entitlement culture where actions have no
consequences and there is no longer a need to take personal
responsibility. As a result of misguided public policy, there
are now large numbers of people on the margins of society with
no stake in their future and nothing to lose. At some stage
this time bomb was bound to go off and it was always going to
be the law abiding who paid the price.
In his speech Iain explained that through the Centre for
Social Justice - the think tank that he founded after stepping
down as Leader of the Conservative Party in 2003 - in-depth
research identified that the main factors contributing to
Britain’s social crisis were family breakdown, poor
education, excessive debt, drug and alcohol addiction, and
welfare dependency and worklessness. In particular they found
that young people growing up in broken homes are 75 percent
more likely to fail at school, 70 percent more likely to
become addicted to drugs, and 50 percent more likely to have
an alcohol problem. In addition a massive 70 percent of all
young offenders caught up in the criminal justice system were
from single parent families. They estimated that the cost to
Britain of this widespread social breakdown was around £100
billion a year – that’s £100 billion a year spent
treating the symptoms of social breakdown, not the cause.
What is
deeply worrying about the developments in the UK is that the
situation we face here in New Zealand is so very similar. Over
the last 30 or more years, we too have had welfare policies
that have encouraged the breakdown of the traditional family
unit and driven dads out of their children’s lives.
Communities of second and third generation mother-only
families can be found around he country where no-one works for
a living, where education is undervalued, and where booze,
drugs, abuse, gangs and criminality are part of everyday life.
The children born into these underclass families have little
hope of living happy and successful lives – unless a helping
hand is given to them by someone from outside of their
immediate family.
The
tragedy is that no politician has had the courage or character
to step in and reform the welfare system sufficiently to
change the incentives that allows an underclass to flourish.
This is not rocket science; it is simply a case where policy
that was designed to help the most vulnerable people in
society is now causing them harm.
Back in
2007 in a speech The
Kiwi Way, it looked as though the Leader of the National
Party, John Key, was prepared to make the necessary changes:
“There are streets in our country where helplessness has
become ingrained. There are streets of people who believe they
are locked out of everyday life. The worst are home to
families that have been jobless for more than one generation;
home to families destroyed by alcohol and P addiction; home to
families where there's nothing more to read than a pizza
flyer; home to families who send their kids to school with
empty stomachs and empty lunch-boxes… These are tough
problems – very tough problems. But I have no intention of
being a Prime Minister who tackles only the easy and
convenient issues. I don't pretend I've got all the solutions.
But I can tell you that dealing with the problems of our
growing underclass is a priority for National, both in
opposition and in government.”
Once in
government National established the Welfare Working Group,
which has provided a comprehensive set of options for dealing
with the country’s entrenched intergenerational welfare
dependency problem. Whether John Key will honour his promise
to curb the growth of the underclass remains to be seen.
At the
present time there are 328,000 people receiving a social
welfare benefit. That’s 10 percent of the working age
population. Almost three quarters have been on a benefit for a
year or more. Some 20 percent have been dependent on a benefit
for 10 years or more. With more than 222,000 children being
brought up in benefit dependent homes, welfare is costing the
country around $20 million a day.
National
used last weekend’s party conference to announce that the
first of their welfare reform election policies would target
teenagers. Some 1,600 teenagers under the age of 18 are either
on the Independent Youth Benefit (which is paid to teenagers
who claim that their relationship with their parents has
broken down) or are teen parents. Evidence shows that a third
of the women who are currently on the Domestic Purposes
Benefit became parents as teenagers. In addition, there are up
to 13,500 16 and 17 year olds who are not in education,
training, or work, and unless something is done, 90 percent of
these young people are expected to end up on welfare as soon
as they turn 18.
The plan
National announced would require that all teenagers leaving
school are engaged in further education, training or work.
This would also apply to teen parents once their baby is a
year old. In order to ensure that they do not waste their
benefit money on booze and drugs, a scheme similar to the
Australian practice of benefit quarantining (developed to deal
with alcohol and drug addiction in outback aboriginal
settlements) would be introduced. It would enable benefit
money to be managed so that essentials like power, rent, and
food are paid first, with the balance left over for
discretionary spending.
When
considering youth unemployment, what should be promoted more
widely are success stories from communities around New Zealand
that have sorted the problem out for themselves - without the
need for more punitive interventions. The township of
Otorohanga is a case in point. It proudly states on its
website that it has had “zero
registered unemployment (under 25 years old) since November
2006”! They explain that they have reduced benefit
dependency amongst all
age groups by 93 percent since 2005, and that they have a
vibrant community with minimal graffiti, vandalism or crime.
Essentially, they developed programmes in the town to provide
targeted training for the range of jobs that are available in
the district, so that young people are assured of future
employment if they undertake the training. In other words, by
working in a coordinated way, the school, training providers,
and employers have been able to ensure school leavers have a
pathway to a good job and a bright future.[1] They have done
what our central government politicians have not been able to
do.
While
ensuring that young people have the skills and discipline to
take on employment is critical, so too is ensuring that jobs
are available. That’s why National’s reticence to look at
re-introducing a youth wage is so surprising – especially
since they opposed its abolition in 2007. Youth wages are not
about giving young people a pay cut as the unions like to
claim, but about giving them the opportunity to take on an
entry-level job at a price employers can afford. There is a
big difference between being able to afford to pay a young
unskilled worker $13 an hour and the youth wage rate of $10.40
an hour. But for the young person, getting $416 a week for
their first job is much better than being stuck on $150 on the
dole.
It has
been estimated that as many as 16,000 jobs have been lost
because of the abolition of the youth wage – jobs that the
country cannot afford to lose. According to the Department of
Labour as at the end of June, 62,300 young people between the
ages of 15 and 24 were not in employment, education or
training. While National appears to have been frightened off
re-introducing a youth wage by the threat of bad publicity
from the unions and the welfare lobby, until they do so we
will know that they are not really committed to giving young
people the best possible chance to get their foot on the
employment ladder.
In his
speech at the party conference, John Key indicated that the
teenage policy was the first of a series of welfare reform
initiatives. With the images of Britain’s rioting and
hooliganism fresh in our memory, for the sake of our future we
must hope that he will step up to fulfil his promise to end
the growth of the underclass.
Meanwhile
in the UK, Prime Minister David Cameron appears determined to
get to the heart of their problems and address the breakdown
of the family that has, more than anything else, contributed
to their social crisis – we’ll leave the last word to him:
"Let me start with families. The question people asked
over and over again last week was ‘where are the parents?
Why aren’t they keeping the rioting kids indoors?’
Tragically that’s been followed in some cases by judges
rightly lamenting: “why don’t the parents even turn up
when their children are in court?” Well, join the dots and
you have a clear idea about why some of these young people
were behaving so terribly. Either there was no one at home,
they didn’t much care or they’d lost control.
“Families
matter. I don’t doubt that many of the rioters
out last week have no father at home. Perhaps they come from
one of the neighbourhoods where it’s standard for children
to have a mum and not a dad… …where it’s normal for
young men to grow up without a male role model, looking to the
streets for their father
figures, filled up with rage and anger. So if we want to have
any hope of mending our broken society, family and parenting
is where we’ve got to start. So: from here on I want a
family test applied to all domestic policy. If it hurts
families, if it undermines commitment, if it tramples over the
values that keeps people together, or stops families from
being together, then we shouldn’t do it… This has got to
be right at the top of our priority list."
This
week’s poll asks:
Do
you believe our government has been tough enough on welfare
reform? Click here for poll >>>
Footnotes:
1..Otorohonga
District Council Youth Programmes
Skip to top Skip
to this weeks poll
Send to friend
Your
Comments:
Reader's
comments will be posted on the NZCPR Forum page click
to view >>>
Skip to top Skip
to this weeks poll
Send
to a friend:
|