Latest news with #BestStart
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- General
- Otago Daily Times
High hopes for early childhood centre
It is hoped a newly opened early childhood centre in Cromwell's fast-growing Wooing Tree Estate will offer much-needed relief to local families, easing pressure on waiting lists at other centres bursting at the seams. BestStart Wooing Tree opened at the end of April on the edge of the new neighbourhood, beside State Highway 8B and close to the entrance of the pedestrian tunnel under the highway, linking it to the town centre. "Interest from local families has been very strong, which reflects the growing need for early childhood education in the Cromwell area," centre manager Emma Stone told The News. "We've had a steady stream of inquiries and are now taking enrolments." For months — if not years — some parents were enrolling their children as soon as they learned they were pregnant, desperate to secure a spot in a town where demand for childcare for under-5s vastly outstripped supply. Cromwell-based mothers support group Mums4Mums co-ordinator Kylie Murdoch said the shortage had placed enormous stress on working households, particularly those dependent on two incomes to manage the region's higher-than-average housing costs. Ms Murdoch said it was still too early to know the impact of the opening of the new centre, but feedback from young families suggested demand was "levelling out". Parents had told other media in the area that the lack of childcare availability had made it difficult — if not impossible — for some to return to work after parental leave, with women disproportionately affected. Some had jobs lined up or contracts signed, only to be forced to delay or abandon their return to the workforce because they could not secure the hours they needed in care. Ms Murdoch said, with the changing job market, she just hoped enough work opportunities would be available for parents that needed them as childcare became more available. Ms Murdoch said there was one upside to the childcare squeeze, "it's created a sense of community with the mums". "They've worked together and found other ways [to support each other]." Meanwhile, Ms Stone advised families interested in enrolling children at the Wooing Tree preschool to "get in touch as soon as possible". BestStart Wooing Tree can cater for up to 80 children, aged three months to 6 years. Soon-to-be-4-year-old Tyson Browne told The News his favourite thing about the centre was its slide.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Govt's Budget Balanced On The Backs Of Low-Income Families
Press Release – Green Party Poverty is a political choice this coalition is repeatedly choosing. Once again, we see the wellbeing of thousands sacrificed in the name of superficial savings and cowardly games of political hot potato, says Ricardo Menndez March. The Government is quietly leaving some of our poorest families hundreds of dollars worse off, ignoring warnings that changes to the accommodation supplement and public housing subsidies will disproportionately target disabled, older, Māori, Pasifika, and young people. 'This is a stealth cut, pushed through with no acknowledgement of the harm it will cause,' says the Green Party's spokesperson for Housing, Ricardo Menéndez March. 'Housing is a human right. We can build an Aotearoa in which everyone has what they need, and nobody is left behind. 'Instead, the Government hoped we wouldn't notice that, hidden under headlines about KiwiSaver and Best Start changes, lies a major policy shift that will leave 13,200 families worse off by $100, even up to $200 per week*. 'Changes to how the Accommodation Supplement is calculated means that income from boarders–which previously were partially exempt because the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) understood these boarders were often family members–now fully counts against eligibility. 'MSD flagged early on that increased hardship was expected to be experienced by disabled people, young people, older New Zealanders and Māori and Pasifika peoples. 'People who receive the accommodation supplement, by definition, already have unaffordable rents. $100 or $200 a week may not feel much for a Prime Minister out of touch with reality, but for thousands of families it's a lifeline that allows them to keep a roof over their head, put food on the table and pay their bills. 'MSD also noted that any 'savings' were likely overstated**, as costs were simply going to be shifted to emergency housing and hardship grants. 'Poverty is a political choice this coalition is repeatedly choosing. Once again, we see the wellbeing of thousands sacrificed in the name of superficial savings and cowardly games of political hot potato,' says Ricardo Menéndez March. Notes: *An estimated 13,200 households will be affected (7,000 on accommodation supplement, 6,200 on public housing subsidies). On average, the 7,000 households with boarders receiving the Accommodation Supplement will be $100/week worse off, and people with 3 boarders would be $202/week worse off. Affected households receiving public housing subsidies would see an average increase of $132/week to the cost of their rent. (Page 21 of the report) **The Government is saving $150m over four years by stripping support (Accommodation Supplement + Income Related Rent Subsidy) from around 13,200 households who have boarders. MSD has told the Government that the savings are likely to be overestimated (page 7 and bottom of page 15 of the report). This is due to people needing hardship assistance, emergency housing, etc as a result of these changes creating costs for other parts of the system.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Govt's Budget Balanced On The Backs Of Low-Income Families
Press Release – Green Party Poverty is a political choice this coalition is repeatedly choosing. Once again, we see the wellbeing of thousands sacrificed in the name of superficial savings and cowardly games of political hot potato, says Ricardo Menndez March. The Government is quietly leaving some of our poorest families hundreds of dollars worse off, ignoring warnings that changes to the accommodation supplement and public housing subsidies will disproportionately target disabled, older, Māori, Pasifika, and young people. 'This is a stealth cut, pushed through with no acknowledgement of the harm it will cause,' says the Green Party's spokesperson for Housing, Ricardo Menéndez March. 'Housing is a human right. We can build an Aotearoa in which everyone has what they need, and nobody is left behind. 'Instead, the Government hoped we wouldn't notice that, hidden under headlines about KiwiSaver and Best Start changes, lies a major policy shift that will leave 13,200 families worse off by $100, even up to $200 per week*. 'Changes to how the Accommodation Supplement is calculated means that income from boarders–which previously were partially exempt because the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) understood these boarders were often family members–now fully counts against eligibility. 'MSD flagged early on that increased hardship was expected to be experienced by disabled people, young people, older New Zealanders and Māori and Pasifika peoples. 'People who receive the accommodation supplement, by definition, already have unaffordable rents. $100 or $200 a week may not feel much for a Prime Minister out of touch with reality, but for thousands of families it's a lifeline that allows them to keep a roof over their head, put food on the table and pay their bills. 'MSD also noted that any 'savings' were likely overstated**, as costs were simply going to be shifted to emergency housing and hardship grants. 'Poverty is a political choice this coalition is repeatedly choosing. Once again, we see the wellbeing of thousands sacrificed in the name of superficial savings and cowardly games of political hot potato,' says Ricardo Menéndez March. Notes: *An estimated 13,200 households will be affected (7,000 on accommodation supplement, 6,200 on public housing subsidies). On average, the 7,000 households with boarders receiving the Accommodation Supplement will be $100/week worse off, and people with 3 boarders would be $202/week worse off. Affected households receiving public housing subsidies would see an average increase of $132/week to the cost of their rent. (Page 21 of the report) **The Government is saving $150m over four years by stripping support (Accommodation Supplement + Income Related Rent Subsidy) from around 13,200 households who have boarders. MSD has told the Government that the savings are likely to be overestimated (page 7 and bottom of page 15 of the report). This is due to people needing hardship assistance, emergency housing, etc as a result of these changes creating costs for other parts of the system.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Govt's Budget Balanced On The Backs Of Low-Income Families
The Government is quietly leaving some of our poorest families hundreds of dollars worse off, ignoring warnings that changes to the accommodation supplement and public housing subsidies will disproportionately target disabled, older, Māori, Pasifika, and young people. 'This is a stealth cut, pushed through with no acknowledgement of the harm it will cause,' says the Green Party's spokesperson for Housing, Ricardo Menéndez March. 'Housing is a human right. We can build an Aotearoa in which everyone has what they need, and nobody is left behind. 'Instead, the Government hoped we wouldn't notice that, hidden under headlines about KiwiSaver and Best Start changes, lies a major policy shift that will leave 13,200 families worse off by $100, even up to $200 per week*. 'Changes to how the Accommodation Supplement is calculated means that income from boarders–which previously were partially exempt because the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) understood these boarders were often family members–now fully counts against eligibility. 'MSD flagged early on that increased hardship was expected to be experienced by disabled people, young people, older New Zealanders and Māori and Pasifika peoples. 'People who receive the accommodation supplement, by definition, already have unaffordable rents. $100 or $200 a week may not feel much for a Prime Minister out of touch with reality, but for thousands of families it's a lifeline that allows them to keep a roof over their head, put food on the table and pay their bills. 'MSD also noted that any 'savings' were likely overstated**, as costs were simply going to be shifted to emergency housing and hardship grants. 'Poverty is a political choice this coalition is repeatedly choosing. Once again, we see the wellbeing of thousands sacrificed in the name of superficial savings and cowardly games of political hot potato,' says Ricardo Menéndez March. Notes: *An estimated 13,200 households will be affected (7,000 on accommodation supplement, 6,200 on public housing subsidies). On average, the 7,000 households with boarders receiving the Accommodation Supplement will be $100/week worse off, and people with 3 boarders would be $202/week worse off. Affected households receiving public housing subsidies would see an average increase of $132/week to the cost of their rent. (Page 21 of the report) **The Government is saving $150m over four years by stripping support (Accommodation Supplement + Income Related Rent Subsidy) from around 13,200 households who have boarders. MSD has told the Government that the savings are likely to be overestimated (page 7 and bottom of page 15 of the report). This is due to people needing hardship assistance, emergency housing, etc as a result of these changes creating costs for other parts of the system.
The Spinoff
4 days ago
- Business
- The Spinoff
Why messing with NZ Super remains political dynamite
Universal super at 65 is increasingly unsustainable, but any attempt to change it will attract fierce political blowback. What's a government to do, wonders Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. No cuts to super – but everything else is on the table Last week's budget delivered a raft of cost-cutting measures, from halving the KiwiSaver member tax credit to tightening access to the Best Start payment. But superannuation was conspicuously untouched – a move that came as no surprise, given NZ First's long-standing defence of the universal pension. High-income earners who can no longer access the KiwiSaver contribution remain fully entitled to super, a benefit projected to cost nearly $25 billion this year and rise to over $45 billion by 2037. Critics have pounced on the apparent double standard, reports RNZ's Susan Edmunds. As economist Shamubeel Eaqub put it: 'It's incoherent … incentives for Kiwis to save for their future [are] means-tested, but New Zealand Super, which is universal welfare for older people, is untouched.' National's slow path to raising the age While ruling out means-testing, both prime minister Christopher Luxon and finance minister Nicola Willis have reiterated National's plan to raise the super age – eventually. The party's policy is to keep the current entitlement age of 65 until 2044, after which it will rise gradually to 67. No one born before 1979 would be affected. In the NZ Herald (paywalled), Fran O'Sullivan argues that such a distant target is little more than political theatre. She contrasts Luxon's timidity on the issue with former National PM Jim Bolger, who methodically raised the age from 60 to 65 over a nine-year period. O'Sullivan notes that Bolger 'managed to convince New Zealanders that a gradual increase … was plain commonsense' at a time when life expectancy was increasing. By contrast, today's leaders seem content to avoid political pain, she writes, even as super becomes an increasingly heavy burden on the budget. One millennial's wail of despair The idea of delaying retirement might make sense on paper – but it's enough to send some younger New Zealanders into an existential tailspin. Writing in The Spinoff this morning, Hayden Donnell delivers a howl of generational frustration: 'Millennials have spent their formative years selling kidneys to pay rent on a draughty villa and getting bullied by gen Z for admittedly being huge losers. They'll spend the next 20 helping fund their parents' generation's Mediterranean cruises. Surely after that they can have a break? I guess not.' Donnell's broader point is that policies like lifting the super age hit those with lower life expectancies and more physically demanding jobs hardest. And while life expectancy has barely moved in recent years – and is even declining in some countries – the financial squeeze on younger generations is intensifying, just as the likelihood of a guaranteed super at 65 starts to fade. Or, in other words: 'Come on man how much shit can people under the age of 40 have shovelled onto them from a great height god damn it christ on a bike argh argh argh no.' 'You can touch anything else. Do not touch my pension' Two of New Zealand's most prominent right-leaning commentators have also weighed in – and their take is not encouraging for National. In his Mike's Minute, Mike Hosking warned that voters' emotional attachment to super far outweighs any argument of fiscal prudence. 'For many, superannuation is untouchable. It's a lifetime's worth of work. 'I paid my taxes' they say, even though that line isn't actually real because we spent your taxes years ago and then borrowed a bit more to keep the lights on.' Hosking's Newstalk ZB colleague Heather du Plessis-Allan was even more emphatic: 'Don't touch my pension. You can touch anything else. Do not touch my pension.' Despite advocating for cuts to almost every other form of welfare, she drew a hard line at super, arguing that she and millions like her had earned it through years of tax contributions. 'So, good luck to Chris Luxon getting this one across the line,' she wrote. With opposition like that from his own ideological camp, Luxon may find that even floating the idea of reform is as far as it goes.
