The Feed the Kids Bill that has been reintroduced into the new New Zealand Parliament still contains no provision to feed the parents who are too poor to make their children breakfast.
Why are these hungry parents not invited for breakfast as well? No parent would have breakfast if their children was to go hungry. Both the parent and child must have gone hungry that morning, perhaps morning after morning. There is no other charitable explanation.
The Bill aims to set up government funded breakfast and lunch programmes in all decile 1-2 schools. The cost is $100 million a year – including food, staffing, administration, monitoring and evaluation.
Lindsay Mitchell was on the money when she wrote:
Even parents reliant on a benefit are paid enough to provide some fruit and modest sandwiches daily.
An inability to do so is a symptom of a greater problem requiring scrutiny – for the sake of their child.
“The ‘income management’ regime provides a response to genuinely hungry children.
It may interest you that even Labour advocated for extended income management in its election manifesto.
Their 2014 ‘Social Development’ policy paper proposed, “…allow[ing] income management to be used as a tool by social agencies where there are known child protection issues and it is considered in the best interests of the child, especially where there are gambling, drug and alcohol issues involved.”
Hungry children is a child protection issue. Parents who fail to feed their children should come to the attention of the child protection authorities. Those on the benefit should be subject to income management because they clearly are spending their money elsewhere.
On the Left, there is a refusal to discuss the role of addiction and incompetent parenting in child poverty. The 2014 election manifesto of the Labour Party is a welcome departure from that tradition of denial.
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments