© 1998 David Tolich

Tuesday 29th September in NZ Herald on Dialogue page.

On 1 October 1998 the Government is introducing the Community Work Programme. People on benefits (initially the target is 60,000) will be expected to complete 20 hours of work per week for the princely sum of a $20.00 allowance plus up to $21.00 transport costs plus their benefit. Further, those who for whatever reason fail to comply with the requirements of this programme will be sanctioned with the consequent reduction or removal of their benefit eligibility.

The Not for Profit and Community and Voluntary sectors have been invited to provide work placements for these beneficiaries, in order to give them some experience to facilitate their transition into the labour market. Interestingly enough, once again the Not for Profit and Voluntary sector is being invited to activate Government policy. No such invitation was extended to this same sector when this Community Work policy (more widely known as Workfare) was designed.

The Community Work programme in fact represents market failure. The economic "reforms" undertaken in New Zealand over the last fifteen years are notable, inter alia, for the rapid increase in the number of people on welfare benefits as well as the consequent destruction of employment opportunities; together with a radical shift of wealth away from the poor and middle classes into the hands of the rich.

Various commentators have highlighted the lack of savings, productive investment and planned growth opportunities; as well as the increasing social dysfunction that has arisen from these "reforms". Of equal importance has been their increasing tendency to sideline democratic accountability and transparency in policy design, in exchange for "strategic management" and a pervasive "managerialism".

Inherent in this "market" strategy has been the intentional aggregation of wealth and concentration of power. Paralleling has been the transferring of responsibility on to the individual and the local community for a variety of services that were previously delivered by the State. Language for example as "mobilising communities" belies a deliberate strategy by Social Welfare to get "ownership" to get local communities to accept responsibility in solving of welfare problems. Less government requires both a shrinking of the resource base (lower taxes) coupled with the reorganising of a range of government services to be delivered by individual citizens and their communities.

In this process of on-going devolution there can be seen the continuous adoption of policy strategies about which the community is never consulted. Secretive policy design carries with it the assumption that transparency applies to delivery and not conception. This is the "new partnership" being sought by the State. Ten-year strategic planning targets e.g. with outcomes to reduce "welfare dependency," are never voted on by the electorate. In fact, the voters are irrelevant in this whole process.

The expectation that has accompanied the marketing of Community Work to offer opportunities for people on benefits to gain skills for increasing their employment opportunities. We need to notice the "case managed individuated" approach being adopted here. It focuses on the individual with the attendant disciplines and sanctions, and ignores the broader macro-economic and political structures. Fortunately significant numbers of community groups are saying NO, to punishing people on benefits

These people are expected to move into the labour market at a most extraordinary time in recent New Zealand economic history. According the Treasurer, New Zealand faces the prospect of zero or negative growth, rising unemployment, and reductions in both government spending and in business confidence. The situation in Japan and China remains uncertain, as does the potential for continued disorder in Russia. Likewise, a number of economic and financial commentators are talking of the real danger of worldwide recession.

We need to ask what the candidates for the Community Work programme are "transitioning" to. It is clear from current economic data that growth in employment opportunities will not occur in the foreseeable future. Likewise, while skills training could be useful, training for training's sake implies a mentality of change for change's sake..

There appears to be a lack of political will to use macro economic planning tools to assess the scope, direction and future of the New Zealand Labour market. What is currently needed is a cross-sectoral conference of Kiwis who can look at the "future of work" in Aotearoa - New Zealand so that some systematic planning can occur. Where and how employment opportunities can be grown is a vital ingredient of any jobs policy. Australia's adopted such an approach and it proved extremely useful.

The current Community Work programme appears to be both wrong in policy design and in intended outcomes. It will not deliver more employment because it is divorced from the current economic realities. It appears rather to be unrelated to employment outcomes and more in line with discipline, harassment and control by sanction. Its focus is on individuals. Its launch has included the use of publicity that suggests a climate where fear, blame, unease and indeed harassment are being deliberately encouraged. Large expense has been incurred in amalgamating various government departments into the new Department of Work and Income. Equal expense is incurred in running advertising campaigns to "dob in beneficiaries". Little analysis appears to have been done to assess the macro-economic environment. Rather once again we appear to have all the hallmarks of the "blame the victim, not the system" approach.

The social services agencies of the Not for Profit and Voluntary sector are being invited to take part in the programme. Not only is their history and raison d'etre threatened by this programme, their current policies towards volunteers are equally in jeopardy. Fortunately many are saying no thank you to the Minister.

Central to the Community Work programme is the use of sanctions in enforcing compliance. The establishment of sanctioning invites the potential for service providers to be both Judge and Executioner over welfare recipients.

It is clear that what is needed in not the further herding of beneficiaries into ghettoes of deserving and undeserving poor. Neither harassment, sanctioning nor a climate of fear will create jobs. What is needed at the moment is a new cross-sectoral dialogue on the "future of work". Outcomes could include the development of a jobs policy and the creation of the political will to achieve it. Kiwis want concrete employment opportunities that will promote social inclusion as well as the chance to both belong and contribute.

David Tolich is a policy analyst with the Methodist Mission Northern in Auckland.

The Methodist Mission has a long involvement in ministering to people, some of whom are on benefits. It helped pioneer the Employment Generation Fund, which addresses key aspects of creating work opportunities

Community Wage | | UBINZ | | GeoCities