Good charities, dirty money

It’s a sad day in New Zealand when we have to rely on charity to feed children at school and provide shoes and raincoats because their families don’t have enough to live on.
I agree with Brian Rudman’s column today where he connects the dots between yesterday’s announcement to allocate $2 million a year for five years to bolster corporate-sponsored breakfast in schools programmes and the legal case the Child Poverty Action Group is taking to provide a $60 per week in the form of the Working for Families tax credit for the 230,000 children in families where the parents are not in paid employment.

The government has also allocated $1.5 million over the next three years to KidsCan – a registered charity set up in 2005 that supplies raincoats and shoes and some health services to 4500 children a day at 279 low decile schools across the country.

The money will go a long way to ensuring kids have the basics and are able to learn. However the government is not paying the full cost of either of these programmes. We are relying on corporates and charities to provide the type of social security the state used to provide which was the envy of developed countries worldwide.

And where does the rest of the money for the KidsCan come from? According to the charities website in 2012 the organisation received $836,225 in grants and sponsorship.

On the KidsCan website they list the many organisations that have funded them. I counted at least six trusts that distribute money from pokie machines and when I looked at just one of those pokie trusts I saw that their machines were located in some of the poorest areas in New Zealand including Manurewa, Tokoroa and Wairoa.

It seems crazy to me that the government abrogates its responsibility to support our most vulnerable and relies on a charity to do that work which in turn relies on money from organisations that rob kiwi kids of their futures.

7 thoughts on “Good charities, dirty money

  1. according to Key’s standard; clean money, dirty money, stolen money, whatever…Don’t they all have buying power? Does it really matter? he asked…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 (-3)

  2. Please explain what is bad about taking the pokies $ people in these communities have spent on their “entertainment” and donating this back to fund the feeding of the kids that may have in fact been deprived of the food as a result of the entertainment spend?

    The ones robbing kids of their future are the ones popping coins into pokies. Its not the Govt, its not the organisations as you put it. People have a choice, they can influence their own outcomes.

    On Planet Green you want to give these people more money to pop into the pokies. Then you want to complain when the money is donated to feed the kids…

    Nutz.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 9 (0)

  3. Always blows my mind how people who can barely live \ survive themselevs can bring kids into this world with no thought on how they will support them financially and seem to think its OK for the government to pick up the tab.

    Meanwhile middle income earners are not having kids becuase they have jobs (childcare is expensive), not to mention mortgages and rates to pay.

    We have got the system all wrong, we should be encouraging the middle class upwards to breed by offering fully funded childcare and perhaps a weekly allowance.

    Result

    – better class of kids being raised
    – less wasted money on welfare

    Break the cycle, support the people that are doing something with their lives.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 (+5)

  4. So you suggest, nzmr2guy, that middle class kids are a better class kid than those born into poor homes? It is a free country so you can publish such class hatred.
    Poor kids in South Auckland have been known to create pandimonium, but rich kids in Takapuna have taken part in similar wicked procedings. It isn’t the amount of money going into the home that produces a ‘good’ kid’, it is the way they are treated, respected and loved which helps them on their way.

    Look through the biographies in the library and you will find through out history people brought up in poverty have often shone in later life.

    What I object to is Mr Key glorifying Fonterra and Sanitarium because they are going to help fund breakfast in schools. Sanitarium pays no tax and not all its profit goes back to the public in aid. Fonterra makes a good profit on the sale of dairy food and I understand that both companies are to receive government aid for their philanthropy.

    Labour did us a great disservice when it cut out Family Benefit which was paid to every mum, whether rich or poor.

    I am surprised to see your Nazi type comments on a blog site run by the Green Party. Go to National Womens and look at new borns, are some of them born with 666 on their foreheads, and do the middle class ones, which you like, bear a large golden star as a sign of superiority.

    Personally I shudder at the thought of multitudes of Pasifica kids being fed milk, they are without an enzime in their gut to cope with milk products, and many succumb to asthma and allergies when given milk.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 (+2)

  5. @Yorkstyke: LOL, im not arguing that some “poor” kids grown up to be productive citizens. But look at the majority and you will see where im coming from.

    Same with the Maori thing, some are good (some are my friends) but the majority are no hopers that drag NZ down, or are in the process of growing up to do the same.

    Most of the time poorness comes as a result of attitude and that attitude flows on into the child raising so it is related.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 (-1)

  6. Great bit of stereotyping by K1W1 – and indeed what is wrong with drawing patrons into your pub by catering to their gambling habits/addictions, making a tidy profit plus some for the government and then returning about 37% back to the community?

    And nzmr2guy, quite right – the lower classes shouldn’t be allowed to breed – well enough for factory fodder and a few more to be on the dole and help keep wages down – but no more. It lowers the tone of the neighbourhood / country.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 (-1)

  7. Keef, I guess that was a tongue in cheek comment. Upper class folk like
    SIR Douglas Graham raise the tone of the neighbourhood, right?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>