Social policy reports 'disappointing’

Press, 18 March 1988, Page 7

Social policy reports 'disappointing’

By

BRENDON BURNS,

political reporter The Royal Commission on Social Policy had produced disappointing reports on income maintenance and taxation, said the Opposition’s associate spokesman on social welfare, Mr Jim I Gerard (Rangiora), yesterday.

The working papers had suggested putting more money into welfare but did nothing to reduce dependence on the State. “I; am really) disappointed,” said Mri Gerard, who with colleagues had been personally i briefed before the release of the working papers ) by the Royal Commission's chairman, Sir Ivor Richardson. Mr Gerard has been telling his electorate that the Royal Commission would produce tlie singularly most important documents on the future of New Zealand isociety.

“Regrettably, ' ( these documents give no . real lead in these areas. There are no hard decisions,” he said.

Two good suggestions were made in the area of accident compensation and national superannuation. ' . ,

Mr Gerard j welcomed the proposal to) treat sickness and disability on the same basis as injuries. The recommendations | ! on national superannua- ' tion provided a good footing for discussion. But even the proposals in this area ■ did not address the needs of those wanting to retire, at 60, because it. made 65 the age at-which support was first promised! < h

“It is saying you should stay at work' until, 65.” However, the ! Royal Commission had also said that unemployment was the scourge of society and

had to be addressed. “But (if (you are encouraging people to stay on hnd work to 65 it has not addressed the implications on employment at the other end of the life cycle,” said Mr Gerard.

Elsewhere in its working papers the Royal Commission had not assessed what its proposals would cost.) .The 'suggested carer’s allowance was a worthy 'concept said Mr Gerard. [This w’ould be paid [to ) women; providing unpaid care to!children, the sick, elderly I and disabled. "I would' be convinced the costs are way beyond what New) Zealand can i afford.’! i

Paying j people who stayed [at home did not necessarily) end such problems as child neglect, he said. | The report should have addressed j how to en-

courage peole to careXjfor and develop themselves. Issues such: as tax .-incentives and | the (provisions of child care to promote individualism had not been fully examined. | ( ■ | “It’ throws, money at people but it does not make sure that long-term there is less ( dependence on the State.? |

Mr Gerard sai>d the Royal Commission had been given ah impjossibld timetable to [produce thq papers because [ the December 17 statement had: trespassed i!n the areas of income maintenr ance and taxation.) ) 1 | It had called for wide public discussion c)n such issues as superannuation). But on the same [day as the papers were released, the Government had introduced a bill ending taxdeductibility for private superannuation, he said. I