Logie Jan: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Logie Jan: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 01 May 2012. Volume:679;Page:1803. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JAN LOGIE (Green) 
: 
 I would like to speak today in support of the concept of an investment approach to welfare but at a Government and a societal level rather than an individual level. The proposed welfare reforms from this Government are missing both the big picture and the individual detail. They are trying to present the welfare reforms as new and innovative—an actuarial approach to welfare and an investment approach. But when you drill down and look at the language and the shape of the reforms in fact it becomes quite clear that there is not much new in this approach.  
Today I would like to focus on just one small aspect of the reforms but a key one: work testing which started with the Future Focus reforms and is now being extended. It is work testing for women on the DPB. I would like to draw attention to the problem of domestic violence in this country. The nature of domestic violence which we know affects one in three women in this country means that its female victims are often unable to work to work in their preferred career or to stay in a job long term. International studies have shown that victims of domestic violence have 15 percent more chance of being jobless and 55 percent more chance of being on a benefit. International research indicates that over a third and up to half of women on the DPB are likely to be in or more important escaping violent relationships—up to a half of the women on the domestic purposes benefit leaving violent relationships.  
To institute mandatory work-preparedness requirements and to pressure women leaving these violent relationships to go into work flies in the face of generations of work in this country to enable women to leave these violent relationships. Admittedly Future Focus does have a work-test exemption for women leaving violent relationships and I assume that this will be in place in the new reforms. But for me this actually heightens my concern with the reforms because it is being used as an excuse: “Don’t worry we’ve got an exemption.” And yet this exemption is not being accessed. When I asked the Ministry of Social Development officials about why such low levels were reported in the ministry’s statistics they noted that staff do not ask. They noted that women may not want to disclose which is my point exactly. These reforms do not protect women. One of the dynamics of abuse is that victims often blame themselves and that makes disclosing difficult. If we are serious about bringing down the rates of family violence in this country and getting women off the DPB then we need to make it as easy as possible for women and children to leave and stay away. Otherwise we are damning women for staying and damning them for leaving. When the Government talks about the decline of the numbers of women on the DPB that is actually something we should be afraid of.  
We need to invest in the structural issues that lead people to need welfare. We need to invest in respectful relationship education strengthening our response to family violence and helping women to leave and get into sustained employment. Reducing family violence and creating jobs will get women off the DPB.  
In 1996 economist Suzanne Snively estimated that the costs of domestic violence in New Zealand then were between $1.2 billion and $5.8 billion a year. More recent research in Australia estimates that there it is $8.1 billion a year in costs. I say to this Government that if you are serious about an economic strategy to bring us into the future address the fundamentals; do not blame the victim.