
Save The Children Says Budget 2025 Must Commit To Improving Children's Wellbeing
Ahead of this week's Budget announcement, Save the Children is calling on the Government to provide greater investment in children following a damning report showing New Zealand ranks among the lowest countries in the OECD for child wellbeing and mental health.
UNICEF's global report card - released this week - shows New Zealand ranks 32nd out of 36 wealthy countries analysed for children's wellbeing, while also highlighting New Zealand has the highest youth suicide rate among the 36 -nearly three times the average-and ranks last for child and youth mental health. It also shows that bullying remains a widespread issue, with New Zealand posting the second-highest rate of bullying among children.
Other reports from Save the Children's own climate modelling showing the impact of climate change on children's lives, alongside Government statistics, show children's wellbeing, including their physical and mental health, basic needs including food security, housing and access to healthcare are under threat.
Additionally, a report released by the Auditor-General, revealed that child-informed budget decisions are critical if we are to avoid harming already vulnerable children and families due to cuts to funding of critical services.
"Government budget decisions have a direct impact on the lives and wellbeing of every New Zealander," says Save the Children New Zealand's Advocacy and Research Director Jacqui Southey.
"It's clear that greater investment is needed to improve the wellbeing of our children. If New Zealand is to have a prosperous future, we need to invest to ensure our children live good lives now and have bright futures to look forward to.
"New Zealand ranking the worst in the world for youth suicides is devasting. Greater government investment in child health, wellbeing and the essentials they need to live good lives now is critical. We need to ensure that as a nation we are making funding decisions that improve the lives of our children and families."
Ms Southey says investing in children also means investing in families to ensure they have liveable incomes, healthy and affordable housing, enough healthy food and access to quality healthcare and education for all ages. These are the foundations of a healthy thriving society.
"The grim reality for many New Zealand families living on the lowest incomes is that they are struggling to afford the very basics. The high cost of housing, food, and electricity, combined with growing unemployment particularly for youth, increased numbers of avoidable hospital admissions and rising child poverty levels are all worrying signs that life is very tough for thousands of New Zealand families, and it is those families who will struggle most in the event of a climate emergency.
"Targeted investment is needed in ensuring liveable incomes for all families, alongside a greater focus on climate emissions reduction and investing in climate resilient child-critical services."

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
June Is Aphasia Awareness Month … But Do You Know What Aphasia Is?
June is Aphasia Awareness Month, but if you dont know what aphasia is, you are not alone. Aphasia – a disorder of language – is estimated to occur in roughly 1/3 of people who experience a stroke. This means it is quite common, yet it is relatively unknown. Aphasia impacts language – not cognition/intellect. A person with aphasia will know what they want to say, but will have difficulty finding words, speaking, reading, writing and/or understanding. The most common and noticeable symptom is word finding difficulty. 'I know it… I just can't speak it' says one person with aphasia. Many of us experience this 'tip of the tongue' phenomenon, but with aphasia, it is significant. If we think about our brains having an organised library of words that we can easily access; with aphasia the library has been shaken up, the books have fallen off the shelves and become mixed up; you know the word/book is there, you just cannot find it. The impact of aphasia is huge. As well as making it hard to express your needs and wants, aphasia may lead to social isolation (even within families), difficulties with relationships, difficulty finding work, and depression (present in 60% of people with aphasia post-stroke). Aphasia is caused by damage to the language centre in the brain (usually in the left hemisphere). The most frequent cause is stroke, but infection, traumatic brain injury or a brain tumour can also lead to aphasia. Says Kate Milford, one of the Founding Trustees of AphasiaNZ, ' with roughly 89,000 New Zealanders currently living with the effects of stroke and an estimated 1/3 of people with stroke having aphasia, we think over 29,000 people are living with aphasia – and this only accounts for aphasia due to stroke.' For comparison, roughly 13,000 people are living with Parkinson's Disease and 70,000 are living with dementia mate wareware. With New Zealand having the fourth highest stroke incidence in the OECD, a trend in younger people with stroke, and with Maori and Pacific Peoples experiencing stroke 10-15 years younger than others, aphasia may play a part in the lives of more New Zealanders than in known. Despite aphasia being common and consequential, awareness and knowledge are low. International studies find 1% – 66% of populations report awareness of 'aphasia', but only 5% – 17% hold basic knowledge. The latest study in New Zealand (2013) suggested 11% of the general population were aware, but only 1.5% had basic knowledge of aphasia; in the health care sector, 68% were aware and 21% had basic knowledge of aphasia. So why is awareness so low? Milford says, 'I think awareness is low for a few reasons. Aphasia is a difficult concept to get your head around – we think about 'speech' and not being able to talk, but we don't necessarily think about 'language' and what the loss of that actually means. Our awareness slogan reflects this – Until you have met it, you just don't get it! Also, when you have aphasia, it is difficult to explain it to other people. And many people with aphasia feel embarrassed at not being able to communicate – there is a perception that saying the wrong word, or being unable to reply to a question means that the person is cognitively impaired. So people with aphasia withdraw from activities and social events. Awareness and knowledge matter, as it is the response of others, to people with aphasia that can make the most positive difference to their lives. Milford notes ' other people CAN help – they can adapt their communication, and get to know the person's own way of communicating. People with aphasia all have strengths – and never cease to amaze me – but you have to stop, spend time and really meet them.' For more information and/or support for aphasia, individuals should contact a local Speech Language Therapist via their GP, or go to


Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
Changes To Fish & Game Continue Coalition's Handover Of Power To Polluters
Press Release – Choose Clean Water Choose Clean Water spokesperson Tom Kay says the changes announced today are clearly designed to remove Fish & Games ability to advocate for the health of rivers. Changes announced to Fish & Game this morning are another move in the Coalition Government's handover of power to intensive farming and other polluting commercial interests, and will result in the further degradation of our rivers and freshwater, say freshwater campaigners. Choose Clean Water spokesperson Tom Kay says the changes announced today are clearly designed to remove Fish & Game's ability to advocate for the health of rivers. 'Fish & Game has used its statutory purpose as a strong advocate for the health of rivers across New Zealand, and as such has helped protect numerous rivers from pollution and degradation.' 'There are some things about the system that do need fixing, but this is not only about that—this is the Coalition Govt taking advantage of an opportunity to reduce Fish & Game's influence over polluters.' 'When environmental groups, local community groups, or iwi can't afford to legally challenge a damaging activity or poorly made decision, Fish & Game is often there to ensure waterways are protected—working on behalf of their members to protect habitat for fish. But this Government is trying to stop that.' The Coalition has stated that Fish & Game's advocacy functions will be 'revised' so regional Fish & Game Councils will only be able to take court action in relation to advocacy if explicitly approved by the New Zealand Fish & Game Council or the Minister and within a new restricted advocacy policy. This morning's press release from Minister for Hunting and Fishing James Meager on the changes states they will restrict the organisation's ability to undertake court proceedings and require 'Fish & Game councils to better consider the interests of other stakeholders such as farmers and the aviation sector in decision-making'. 'It's telling that the Government has said specifically that it wants Fish & Game to better consider farming interests. Why not public health interests? Why not the interests of future generations? Why not the myriad of other commercial interests that operate in our communities? This demonstrates that this decision is another example of the Government enabling more pollution in rivers, lakes, and drinking water sources, and the handing of more power over our water to polluting commercial interests like intensive farming.' 'We know how detrimental the influence of Ministers can be over the statutory purposes of agencies like the Department of Conservation to protect our environment, for example. This is another case of Ministers being given the power to step in and stop actions that would protect our environment.' Fish & Game led the processes to secure many Water Conservation Orders —similar to National Parks—for our rivers, protecting them for anglers and the public alike to enjoy. In 2002 they launched a large campaign against 'Dirty Dairying' and the conversion of land into intensive agriculture, particularly in the South Island. More recently, Fish & Game took up a legal challenge against ongoing extreme pollution of Southland's waterways where dairy interests were wrongly claiming 'there is no evidence of diffuse discharges from farming activities, either individually or cumulatively, causing adverse effects, including significant adverse effects on aquatic life'. 'Proponents of damaging, intensive agriculture and other major polluters are all over this Government's decisions. This decision stinks of undue influence.'


Scoop
4 hours ago
- Scoop
Changes To Fish & Game Continue Coalition's Handover Of Power To Polluters
Press Release – Choose Clean Water Choose Clean Water spokesperson Tom Kay says the changes announced today are clearly designed to remove Fish & Games ability to advocate for the health of rivers. Changes announced to Fish & Game this morning are another move in the Coalition Government's handover of power to intensive farming and other polluting commercial interests, and will result in the further degradation of our rivers and freshwater, say freshwater campaigners. Choose Clean Water spokesperson Tom Kay says the changes announced today are clearly designed to remove Fish & Game's ability to advocate for the health of rivers. 'Fish & Game has used its statutory purpose as a strong advocate for the health of rivers across New Zealand, and as such has helped protect numerous rivers from pollution and degradation.' 'There are some things about the system that do need fixing, but this is not only about that—this is the Coalition Govt taking advantage of an opportunity to reduce Fish & Game's influence over polluters.' 'When environmental groups, local community groups, or iwi can't afford to legally challenge a damaging activity or poorly made decision, Fish & Game is often there to ensure waterways are protected—working on behalf of their members to protect habitat for fish. But this Government is trying to stop that.' The Coalition has stated that Fish & Game's advocacy functions will be 'revised' so regional Fish & Game Councils will only be able to take court action in relation to advocacy if explicitly approved by the New Zealand Fish & Game Council or the Minister and within a new restricted advocacy policy. This morning's press release from Minister for Hunting and Fishing James Meager on the changes states they will restrict the organisation's ability to undertake court proceedings and require 'Fish & Game councils to better consider the interests of other stakeholders such as farmers and the aviation sector in decision-making'. 'It's telling that the Government has said specifically that it wants Fish & Game to better consider farming interests. Why not public health interests? Why not the interests of future generations? Why not the myriad of other commercial interests that operate in our communities? This demonstrates that this decision is another example of the Government enabling more pollution in rivers, lakes, and drinking water sources, and the handing of more power over our water to polluting commercial interests like intensive farming.' 'We know how detrimental the influence of Ministers can be over the statutory purposes of agencies like the Department of Conservation to protect our environment, for example. This is another case of Ministers being given the power to step in and stop actions that would protect our environment.' Fish & Game led the processes to secure many Water Conservation Orders —similar to National Parks—for our rivers, protecting them for anglers and the public alike to enjoy. In 2002 they launched a large campaign against 'Dirty Dairying' and the conversion of land into intensive agriculture, particularly in the South Island. More recently, Fish & Game took up a legal challenge against ongoing extreme pollution of Southland's waterways where dairy interests were wrongly claiming 'there is no evidence of diffuse discharges from farming activities, either individually or cumulatively, causing adverse effects, including significant adverse effects on aquatic life'. 'Proponents of damaging, intensive agriculture and other major polluters are all over this Government's decisions. This decision stinks of undue influence.'