Checks by department anger M.P.

Press, 11 December 1982, Page 1

Checks by department anger M.P.

Parliamentary reporter Methods used by the Social Welfare Department to assess whether students should get an emergency unemployment benefit may be illegal, according to the Labour member of Parliament for Christchurch Central, Mr G. W. R. Palmer.

Mr Palmer yesterday described the department’s methods as a gross invasion of privacy. He was commenting on a number of letters received by Labour members from s “outraged parents” whose children have applied for an emergency unemployment ~ benefit. They complained be- 1 cause they were asked by the department to supply details of their income and assets. In one documented case, the department wrote to the employer of a parent asking for details of his earnings. The man, who lives at Paraparaumu, wrote to. the department, the Minister of Social Welfare (Mr Young), and his member' of Parliament, Mrs Margaret Shields, to protest about the action.

Mr Young laced a barrage of questions in' Parliament this week about the methods

used to assess whether students were eligible for an emergency unemployment benefit. Full-time students who cannot find holiday work must apply for an emergency unemployment benefit because they are not eligible for the usual benefit. Mr Young told Parliament that applicants for the unemployment benefit who lived with their parents at home, whether during the full year or only at holiday time, were the only category whose parents were income-tested.

“Emergency , benefits are granted on grounds of hardship. Thus, the Social Security Commission is required to take the full financial circumstances of any applicant into account." he said.

"When a student is living at home during a vacation, it is considered reasonable to expect his or her parents to support the student, if their financial circumstances permit them to do so."

In cases of hardship/ each application was considered according to individual need. The benefit was not aimed to allow the student to build up funds to attend university for a further year.

The age of the student was not taken into account, so long as he or- she was living at home; said Mr Young. The income assessment took into account cash assets, such as bank and' savings accounts. - shares and debentures, but not material assets.

Mr Young said that the authority to assess the income of parents of applicants for an emergency unemployment- - benefit came from the Social Security Act. 1964.

Mr Palmer said the income assessment was an “invasion of dignity and privacy.” He has had a number of complaints from his constituents in Christchurch.

“This has only come to a head as a result of the universities and training colleges stopping for the year." he said. "It is obvious that this is being used as a technique- to frighten away applicants so they do not have to pay so much money."

Mr Palmer criticised the assessments because of the delay they created for students who needed the emergency unemployment benefit.

He was also critical because the criteria used by

the department in assessing whether a parent should be able to support a son or daughter was not made public.

He said the policy for the granting of the emergency unemployment benefits to students should be reviewed. The review should also consider the two week standdown period and the level of income permitted before the benefit was cut.

However, he bitterly attacked the department for asking parents' employers for details of their earnings. He said this was a gross violation of human rights, which was “very nasty and very probably unlawful." He advised any parent whose employer had been approached in this way to take a case to the Ombudsman or to sue the department. “There is nothing in the act that gives any statutory authority to make inquiries in this way," he said. The department was trying to get information from a person's employer without legal entitlement and without the permission of the person who had applied for a benefit. The assistant director-gen-eral of benefits in the Social Welfare Department, in Wellington. Mr B. H. C. Tyler, confirmed that there had been one recent case when the department had approached the employer of a parent whose student son had applied for the emergency unemployment benefit. However, it was not the standard practice, he said. The department usually accepted the parent's statement of income and assets, but a check with the employer could be made if the director-general believed some verification was needed.

Mr Tyler said the authority for employer checks came from the department's operating manuals. He could not comment on the legality of the checks.