Francesca Rudkin: The new Jobseeker sanctions are worth a try - Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Yesterday the Prime Minister said that the vast amount of people on Jobseeker Benefits were trying hard to find a job and meet their obligations, and before we have a conversation about changes to the Jobseeker Benefit, that is important to remember.   

But we do have a problem with the number of people on the Jobseeker Benefit, and how long they are on it.   

According to the current government, the number of people on Jobseeker Support increased by 70,000 under the previous government as the use of sanctions significantly decreased, and almost two-thirds of the people receiving this benefit have been for over a year.  

The Government’s plan clarifies what they see as the deal between the government and the Jobseeker beneficiary. They have basically said, there are some responsibilities you must meet to receive this benefit, and if you take those responsibilities seriously, then life goes on.   

The changes Cabinet have agreed to include: 

Requiring Jobseeker Support recipients to reapply every six months, instead of annually – sensible.   

Requiring all beneficiaries with work obligations to have a jobseeker profile before receiving a benefit – I would have thought that was already in place!   

The introduction of a traffic light system that informs people what is required of them and alerts them if they are not keeping up with their requirements – which is a fair move as it gives people the chance to get back on track.  

Those who aren’t interested in fulfilling their obligations could face sanctions such as money management, where half of the benefit goes onto a payment card that can only be used for a limited range of essential products and services.   

Social Development and Employment Minister Louse Upston explained this to Heather du Pleiss-Allen last night: 

“So the traffic light system: green, you're complying; orange, you've got a warning; red, there's a sanction. So, at the moment the sanctions are either a 50% reduction in the benefit or a cancellation completely. We want to introduce for parents, in particular, a maximum reduction of 50%, but instead of going to that straight away, we could then use a non-financial measure like money management, so they still get the same amount of money but less choice over how they use it.” 

Surely this is a better alternative to outright cutting of the benefit? But it is one measure which comes with some risk – the last thing we want to see is the welfare of children or family affected by this sanction.   

There is also a new community work sanction requiring beneficiaries to "build skills and confidence", and they have extended the period a failure to meet obligations counts against a beneficiary from one year to two years, which seems a bit petty.   

All in all, these are the checks and balances we would expect for people on a benefit, and hopefully they will be delivered with respect.   

But will these measures get people back into work? Alongside these obligations, we still need to keep working on breaking down barriers that prevent people finding work – especially with our young people.   

Former welfare expert advisory group member and also former BusinessNZ CEO Phil O'Reilly spoke to the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning about the importance of this:  

“One thing that was happening very well under the last government was the idea of at least building some work capable skills. So the idea of getting people a driver's licence and a site safety certificate and so on, just so they could go get a job in construction, for example. All of that, I think, is a really important part of b