I am writing to object to the Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Bill
Although it is clear there are a number of people / families accepting and believing benefit is a way of life and in some of these cases it has become a generational way of life even a generational way of thinking – this is not the majority.
Unemployment is a real factor in so many lives at the moment (Even a popular supermarket is using unemployment in their latest television adverts, as it is happening to so many), especially of late during the current financial climate there are more and more families facing and having to deal with unemployment and needing benefit who would never entertain this way of living or thinking.
As much as I believe this issue needs addressing – withholding benefit unless the person / persons act according to the government demands is not the way, and in essence that is what this bill is proposing.
How can a government of such an incredible country push for children to be sent to ECE when it has been proven time and time again (of which I know numerous documented studies have already been submitted) that ECE care does not provide the best environment for a young child because the best environment is at home with their mother.
What right does a government have to take that option away from a mother? Or threaten them with no benefit if they should chose to keep their child at home with them.
If this bill goes ahead my question is this :
What’s next ? No benefit unless a family votes a particular way ??
Is it not the same? – do as we say or you won’t receive help?
Consider this view: “As we are pushed to increase women’s participation in the workforce, we need to ask who will be raising our next generation … I advocate for choice – for women to work part-time or full-time in paid work, or not at all, or to stay home and raise their children … A good government does not come into people’s homes and tell them how to raise their children.”
A powerful argument, and – you know where I’m going with this – an argument made by Paula Bennett, in her maiden speech to Parliament in 2005.
As I have mentioned before, I agree there is an issue with a minority, and this does need dealing with, but this does not give the government the right to pass a law that allows them to dictate how a child should be raised. This is a human right belonging to the mother / father.
As a country we are quick to point the finger at China and it’s inhuman one child per family policy, but are we not subtly starting to do the same? This bill will allow the government to dictate how a child should be raised – this is the family’s right not the government and to hold this right to ransom is a fundamental wrong.
It is for these reasons I do not agree with this amended bill.