Nats float ‘no jab, no pay’ policy

In the wake of the measles outbreak sweeping the country, the National Party has said it might sanction sole parent beneficiaries who don’t vaccinate their children.

National’s social development spokeswoman, Louise Upston, has gone further, saying she is open to broadening the scope beyond beneficiaries to cover more child-related payments, if that’s what New Zealanders want.

The proposal was one of a raft of policy ideas, including timelimiting the dole for under-25s and controlling the money of teenage beneficiaries. The ‘no jab, no-pay’ idea is listed in National’s social services discussion document released yesterday as a question for feedback, rather than a concrete proposal at this stage.

The idea comes weeks after a measles epidemic shocked New Zealand. That has prompted a serious discussion about whether the country should move to a ‘no jab, no pay’ model as is used in Australia. Some Australian states, such as New South Wales and Victoria, effectively prohibit unvaccinated children from attending childcare at all.

New Zealand is thought to lack ‘‘herd immunity’’ to measles in some areas and some age groups after a drop in vaccinations since

2016.

A vaccination rate of around

95 per cent is needed for herd

National’s Louise Upston

immunity. Just 77.4 per cent of eligible children were immunised at six months.

According to the Australian Government in September, the ‘no jab, no pay’ scheme, which was introduced in 2015, prompted an extra 174,000 child vaccinations last year, after families were warned they would lose government payments.

The Australian-style policy was strongly backed by Northland doctor and former New Zealander of the Year Lance

O’Sullivan last month.

Upston, a former recipient of the sole parent benefit, said that if the state was helping pay for a child to be brought up, it must ensure they were brought up well.

‘‘If the taxpayer is supporting you to look after your kids then you should look after them,’’ Upston said.

She said it was timely given the current outbreak and the Australian experience.

‘‘Who would have thought in 2019 in New Zealand we would have measles outbreak. It’s outrageous.’’

She was open to the idea of widening the scope of any potential ‘no jab, no pay’ scheme to beyond beneficiaries.

‘‘I want to hear what New Zealanders think. I want to hear what their views are. Do they think we should have more mandatory levels of vaccination? The purpose of the discussion document is being able to float ideas and ask questions.’’

The policy is, however, at odds with National’s previous position – both in Government and Opposition. Its associate health spokesman, Shane Reti, told Stuff in August that the party was against ‘‘no jab, no pay’’ policies as they

‘‘If the taxpayer is supporting you to look after your kids then you should look after them.’’

were too intrusive. ‘‘Our position and my position is that ‘no jab, no pay or no play’ – we think that’s too intrusive on the family,’’ Reti said.

‘‘That is disproportionately going to hurt those on the benefit. It won’t affect the rich.’’

Associate health minister Julie Anne Genter, and some experts, said the policy would not help as those who weren’t getting vaccines were mostly not full-on anti-vaxxers.

‘‘We’re making it easier for people to do the right thing, not punishing children for adults working multiple jobs, having poor transport options, and struggling to see a GP,’’ Genter said. ‘‘We will be guided by evidence of what will protect children, not populist rhetoric.’’

Genter announced yesterday that measles vaccines would be available at pharmacies in an effort to combat the epidemic, which has seen 1900 confirmed cases this year.

Upston said all discussion documents had caucus approval, but it was natural that with 55 MPs there was a diversity of views within the party.

Immunisation Advisory Centre director Nikki Turner said National’s policy was posing a question about what was overly punitive, as it focused solely on sole parents.

‘‘It targets people from poverty who have significant issues and a mandatory policy does not solve those problems,’’ Turner said.

‘‘This is picking up on the Australian strategy, and the health data shows it can improve coverage a little bit, but it can also polarise people and communities and increase hardship for people in those low income areas.’’

The National Party has signalled a crackdown on welfare alongside longer hospital stays for new mothers if elected next year.

The crackdown could include a timelimit on the dole for under 25-year-olds and a sanction for parents on benefits who don’t immunise their children.

The party’s social services discussion document, released yesterday, includes a mixture of concrete policies it wants to enact if elected next year as well as proposals it wants feedback on.

In general, the policies point towards a tougher more punitive stance on beneficiaries and a return to the social investment approach favoured by National when last in Government.

Social investment aimed to reduce the number of New Zealanders relying on social services and the overall costs for taxpayers by using big data to focus early interventions.

National Party leader Simon Bridges said the party believed social services should be a hand-up, not a hand-out.

‘‘We understand that sometimes people need help to get back on their feet. We also know that help is paid for through the taxes paid by all New Zealanders – so there needs to be accountability and obligations met in return.’’

Gangs targeted

The National Party says gang members should have to prove income and assets are legal before claiming a benefit.

The document states: ‘‘National hates gangs. They peddle misery in our communities and are responsible for the scourge of drugs in New Zealand.’’

Bridges told Stuff the move was prompted by the exponential increase in gang numbers and if elected next year, National would crack down hard on gangs.

The latest police figures reveal there are 6735 patched and prospect gang members across the country.

The greatest increase was in the Tasman district with an 82.4 per cent increase – from 68 to 124 members. In the Bay of Plenty and Eastern district, membership has increased by more than 200 people, while Northland was the only area where there was no increase – with a 2 per cent decrease.

‘‘They are not these friendly wha¯ nau and community organisations that some bill them as. They peddle misery in the form of drugs and violence.’’

As a Crown prosecutor, Bridges saw first hand the misery gangs peddle and if he was prime minister he would make sure gangs could not exploit taxpayers, he said.

National will release its ‘‘Gang Plan’’ in 2020, which will compel government agencies to share information about gang members and their families so they are supported to be violence and drug-free. The gangs were known and there were a raft of touch points between gangs and agencies, so the Ministry of Social Development would be tasked to administer the policy, Bridges said. ‘‘If there is some hassle involved, I reckon it is worth it. We are serious about cracking down on gangs.’’

There has been some criticism about National putting the onus on the patched gang members but it was not unusual, he said. There were already a raft of laws in relation to organised crime such as the proceeds of crime and anti money laundering laws.

‘‘I think it is common sense because it is about the person who has the power to provide the information having to front up with that.’’

Police Minister Stuart Nash said it was ‘‘desperate political grandstanding’’ on the part of Bridges who seemed to have only just realised gangs had a presence in New Zealand.

‘‘Gang numbers started growing when the Rebels Motorcycle Club from Australia established a foothold in 2011, under the previous government. The following year, police numbers fell by 150. Criminals began to be deported from Australia in even greater numbers in 2015. His government responded by freezing spending on police.’’

Sanctions against those with undeclared income were already enforced, he said. Police, Inland Revenue and the Ministry of Social Development already went hard on benefit fraud and tax fraud – whether or not someone had a patch on their back.

The National Party policy also signalled a crackdown on welfare.

‘‘Enforcement agencies don’t get at criminal offending by going after little children in beneficiary households. We are going after gangs and organised crime with increased investment in new police. We have deployed 1745 new police since taking office. Another 300 police recruits are currently in training,’’ Nash said.

He challenged Bridges to prove he was about more than cheap slogans.

Tougher attitude to welfare

National’s tough-on-beneficiary stance is present in several policies both proposed and floated.

The sanction on sole mothers who don’t name the father of their child, which Labour abolished, would return and the proposal to sanction beneficiary parents who don’t vaccinate their children is also floated.

Under-25s are a particular focus. The party is keen to take more control of the money paid to beneficiaries aged under

20 with a ‘‘money management’’ system that would pay their rent and other costs directly from their dole, and would extend this to all under-25s who don’t meet certain obligations.

The party would reintroduce targets to reduce the number of children in benefit-dependent homes.

National’s social development spokeswoman Louise Upston said the best route out of poverty was through the security of a regular pay cheque and the policies would tackle welfare dependency. ‘‘We believe that beneficiaries who do some work shouldn’t be penalised for working more hours, so we’re supporting the [Government’s] rise in abatement rates to help New Zealanders on welfare take up increasing employment.’’

Focus on first 1000 days

The raft of proposals also includes measures to increase government intervention in the first 1000 days of a baby’s life.

The party plans to increase postnatal care to three days of fully-funded care in a facility of the mother’s choice and wants to split parental leave between parents and let them take it together.

State housing reform

National’s tough welfare approach continues into the public housing portion of the document.

It proposes re-introducing tenancy reviews for public housing tenants and evictions for anti-social behaviour.