Social Welfare Review raising some controversial issues

The Social Welfare Review has drawn a high level of interest but the submissions are coming through more slowly than anticipated but those that have been received have raised quite controversial issues.
The Welfare Review is simply that – a review – and is designed to find out what the views of the public to the Welfare system and the responses will give the Ministry an informed view of the Welfare system as experienced by the beneficiaries and might show any deficiencies in the system.
The Secretary of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Bredina Drollet said: “The review is not proposing a solution at this stage. It is the first step of a much longer process and is focusing on the underlying intention of the welfare system. Once we have received all the responses, the Ministry will report back to Cabinet with some policy options.”
Drollet said that the outer islands have been reached via their respective Island Secretaries and also through publicity in the newspapers and radio. For instance, she is delighted with the on air responses by listeners when Director of Social Welfare, John Henry went on Radio Cook Islands talkback to publicize the Review and the issues involved.
Issues raised that have caused controversy amongst beneficiaries are the possibility of means testing (right now even if they are in full time employment, they may receive the pension). Surprisingly, some have even asked for portability of their benefits if they leave the country. The latter is highly unlikely given the limited resources of the Cook Islands.
Secretary of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, said the discussion paper was released on 8 February 2010 and today (Wednesday 17 March) is the official deadline – with the distinct possibility of extending the timelines to ensure that all submissions are received.
The submission paper were designed to promote discussion and debate but respondents need not feel they have answer every single question on the submission (much of which is policy oriented) but to feel free to comment only the parts that you wish to comment on.
The Review poses questions on: the purpose of welfare payments; types of benefits (old age pension, child and destitute/infirm); who should receive welfare payments; what is an appropriate level of welfare payment. In other words, are the benefits adequate to meet the needs of those who are most vulnerable in our society: the aged, the children and the destitute or infirm.
It also asks if there are other safety nets that should be considered such as the role of the community, extended family supports, superannuation, insurance and so on in helping families or individuals in need.
The Secretary said some individual submissions have been received but those from NGOs (non government organizations) have been a bit slower. The Ministry have already allowed for this and they plan to sort through the responses already received with the view to holding meetings with individual NGOs where they can deliver their views orally and have them recorded as part of the review process.
Drollet said the input of the NGOs would be very valuable as they have a wider base of people whom they represent rather than their own individual opinion, valuable though that may be.The Ministry has kept a register of those who requested the papers and were sent an electronic copy of the submission paper and they plan to contact all those who asked for the papers but who have not yet submitted their responses.
“It is unlikely that there will be changes of significance in the upcoming budget as a lot of work is required in developing options, assessing alternatives, the financial implications, impact on other policies and whether there is capacity in the existing systems to support the changes” said Drollet.
Benefit Payments at a glance:
• pensions for qualified senior citizens ($400 per month);
• payments to parents of children up to the age of 12 ($60 per month);
• payments to the destitute and infirm ($150 per month)

Under s44 of the Welfare Act the destitute or infirm is defined as “a person unable permanently to support himself by his own means or labour and includes persons with dependents where such dependents are unable through infirmity or age to support themselves by their own means and labour”
The Ministry interprets this as being being aimed at the permanently infirm and at their carers as well. Trouble is that under s50 payments of relief is for 3 months and not exceeding one year.
Question is how a permanently infirm person (physical or mental incapacitation through accident, stroke or genetic) or their full time carer supposed to keep body and soul together once the benefit is cut off after one year?
The Ministry acknowledges the dilemma in all the categories and hence their review of Welfare policies which are currently $11.2million annually or 40% of the budget for Intaff.

Herald Issue 463 10 June
- World famous activist assisting residents
- Budget will decide if residents prosecute Government over landfill
- Forestry project sucking Mangaia dry
- Budget 2010 – fiasco or disaster?