Campaigns

Latest: More children than elderly living in hardship - Dom Post

More children than elderly living in hardship

Assoc Prof Nikki Turner, Dominion Post, Mon 2 Sept

New Zealand is not treating its children fairly, writes Nikki Turner. The recent Court of Appeal ruling on discrimination against children from beneficiary families stated that these children are discriminated against with the In-Work Tax Credit part of the Working for Families Package, creating material disadvantage. However, the court also ruled that discrimination is justified on the basis of creating a goal of incentivising people into work. So the moral high ground, that discrimination has taken place, is won but the legal case is lost in that the Government is allowed to discriminate....

Voters support extension of tax credits to beneficiaries, poll finds

Claire Trevett, New Zealand Herald, 30 July 2013

Just over half of voters support extending Working for Families in-work tax credits of at least $60 a week to beneficiaries - a result that has surprised and pleased the Child Poverty Action Group. In a Herald-DigiPoll survey of 750 voters taken last month, 51 per cent said they agreed with the Child Poverty Action Group's wish for the tax credits for parents to be extended to parents on welfare. Forty-one per cent disagreed with it.... click here for full article

Working for Families to be challenged at Court of Appeal

Nine to Noon, Radio New Zealand, Mon 27 May

The in-work tax credit is supposed to be a work incentive but it is poorly designed.  Around 230,000 children living in poverty miss out because their parents do not meet the stringent criteria. She says the group wants the Court of Appeal to declare the tax credit unlawful under human-rights legislation, and the Government should then change the scheme to make sure all low-income children are treated the same...

 

Call for change to in-work tax credit

Newstalk ZB News, Mon 27 May

A group fighting to end child poverty is hoping to change the rules around how much struggling parents receive from the Government...

 

Combating Child Poverty in the Courts

Daily Blog, Micheal Timmins, Mon 27 May

This week in Wellington the rights of the child will be under the microscope.  Child Poverty Action Group is taking on the Government in the Court of Appeal seeking a declaration that the impact of the “In Work Tax Credit” unfairly discriminates against 230,000 children.  For me, the case is critical because...

 

Opinion:Tax break penalises poorest kids

Assoc Prof Nikki Turner, Dominion Post, Tue 28 May

We have universal, non-judgmental support for our elderly. Policies for our children are highly targeted and discriminatory. This is our choice as a country, despite the fact it flies in the face of all logic when the greatest gains long term are likely to be from investment in the early years. The Child Poverty Action Group has been pursuing the issue of discrimination against our poorest children since 2008...

 

 Tax credit fails to help poorest children, court told

Radio New Zealand News, Tue 28 May

...Ms Joychild said working families with one child still receive part of the tax credit when earning $71,000 a year, while many beneficiary families earning $15,000 a year get nothing...


 Working families tax credit not aimed at reducing poverty, court told

New Zealand Herald, Wed 29 May

...But Justice Anthony Randerson questioned whether the policy was intended only as a work incentive, saying there was clearly multiple purposes, including increasing income and alleviating poverty...


Crown says necessary to exclude beneficiaries from tax credit

Checkpoint, Radio New Zealand, Wed 29 May

 On Wednesday, the Crown told the court that because the purpose of the credit is to encourage people into work, it is necessary to distinguish between beneficiaries and working families...


Free breakfast as poverty solution? Yeh right. 

Brian Rudman, New Zealand Herald, Wed 29 May 

It's perhaps churlish to note how convenient it was for Prime Minister John Key that the unveiling of his big schools breakfast package just happened to coincide with the Child Poverty Action Group's case in the Court of Appeal on behalf of the 230,000 poor children excluded from the Government's $60-a-week child poverty assistance grant...


Parnell Parents and memories of Alamein Kopu

Daily Blog, John Minto, Wed 29 May

...In the Appeal Court in Wellington this week the Child Poverty Action Group is arguing that this spiteful discrimination against the children of beneficiaries is unlawful. If the Appeal Court has any decency and humanity then CPAG will win. If they do win and force the government to stop discriminating then that will do much more for children’s food security than John Key’s bull*&#@ breakfast...


Tax & Welfare: Time to get cereal about our kids

Gareth Morgan Blog, Thur 30 May

...In a twist of irony, at the same time as the PM was making soothing noises about food, judges in the Court of Appeal were dealing with this more pressing issue, working their way through blow by blow accounts of how aspects of Working for Families are contributing to the struggle of New Zealand’s poorest families...



Welfare Policies Need an Injection of Compassion

Scoop Opinion: Juliet Bonney, Fri 31 May

...Rather than the In-Work Tax Credit acting as an incentive for beneficiaries to go to work so they can feed themselves and their children, it is more like a hand wielding a threatening stick – similar to how Harry Farr was threatened by his Sergeant Major...


Voters support extension of tax credits to beneficiaries, poll finds

Claire Trevett, New Zealand Herald, Tues 30 July 2013

Just over half of voters support extending Working for Families in-work tax credits of at least $60 a week to beneficiaries - a result that has surprised and pleased the Child Poverty Action Group. In a Herald-DigiPoll survey of 750 voters taken last month, 51 per cent said they agreed with the Child Poverty Action Group's wish for the tax credits for parents to be extended to parents on welfare. Forty-one per cent disagreed with it.... click here for full article

Poverty group's appeal against in-work tax credit dismissed

New Zealand Herald, Fri 30 Aug

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by the Child Poverty Action Group which challenged the Government's in-work tax credit, saying it discriminated against beneficiaries.

 

Govt tax credit may face Supreme Court challenge

Newstalk ZB, Sat 31 Aug

A group challenging the Government's in-work tax credit is considering taking its fight to the Supreme Court. The Child Poverty Action Group has lost its argument in the Court of Appeal, where it said the credit unjustly discriminates against beneficiaries.Economics spokeswoman Susan St John says it's now consulting lawyers and its members about whether to take the case further...

 

 

Court ruling fails to uphold equity and child wellbeing

Every Child Counts Press Release, Sat 31 Aug

The Court of Appeal ruling released yesterday that the discrimination inherent in the In-Work Tax Credit is justified, ignores the evidence that poverty is damaging children and government policy is a central cause, says Every Child Counts...

 

Tax credit ruling may be challenged

Radio New Zealand, 1 Sept 2013

The Child Poverty Action Group says it is considering whether to seek leave to go to the Supreme Court to challenge a Court of Appeal decision on the Working for Families tax credit. The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against a ruling rejecting the group's bid to have the tax credit declared unlawful under human rights legislation...

 

More children than elderly living in hardship

Assoc Prof Nikki Turner, Dominion Post, Mon 2 Sept

New Zealand is not treating its children fairly, writes Nikki Turner. The recent Court of Appeal ruling on discrimination against children from beneficiary families stated that these children are discriminated against with the In-Work Tax Credit part of the Working for Families Package, creating material disadvantage. However, the court also ruled that discrimination is justified on the basis of creating a goal of incentivising people into work. So the moral high ground, that discrimination has taken place, is won but the legal case is lost in that the Government is allowed to discriminate....