UNICEF pimps a report so they can bludge more cash from Kiwis

UNICEF are pimping a report into child poverty that claims more kids than ever before are living below some arbitrary poverty line.

A poverty line that would have three-quarters of the third world gagging at such largesse.

UNICEF says it’s time the Government did something to help lift M?ori and Pasifika children out of poverty, even if it means targeting them because of their race.

About 300,000 Kiwi kids live below the poverty line according to UNICEF. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child on Saturday slammed New Zealand’s ongoing failure to fix the problem.

UNICEF New Zealand executive director Vivien Maidaborn told The Nation on Sunday the Government’s doing a lot, but the outcomes “don’t stack up” because they aren’t addressing the wider causes of poverty.

“Specific initiatives for children will only ever go so far. It needs to be connected to housing policy, employment policy, economic development.”

The UN report said affirmative action should be taken “if necessary”, and even singled out M?ori and Pasifika children, as well as “ethnic minorities, refugee children, migrant children, children with disabilities, lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgender and intersex children and children living with persons from these groups”. ? Read more »


How’s that world class education system that Labour bangs on about?

Not so well.

Chippy probably sees nothing here to change either, despite the alarming statistics.

A new Unicef report measuring the gap between “average” children and the poor has ranked New Zealand 35th out of the 41 OECD countries in educational achievement courtesy of its bad Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa) results in 2012.

The Unicef report Fairness for Children contained league tables of the gaps in income, education, health and quality of life in the 41 OECD countries.

The assessment was done according to Pisa results between 2006 and 2012 and showed the gap had increased over that time. It found that across the OECD, children from poor backgrounds were 18 percentage points more likely to achieve low results than the average child. In New Zealand, that was about 21 percentage points. It also ranked New Zealand 17th in income inequality but New Zealand was not included in the analyses of health or life satisfaction. ? Read more »


Child poverty is the new Global Warming

I know that seems an absurd statement. ?But when I realised that the New Zealand parliament and the UK parliament were being hit about 25% of their respective nation’s children living in “poverty”, a light went on

A quarter of children in Britain are living in poverty, a controversial report by a United Nations agency claimed yesterday.

Millions ?have fallen prey to the dangers of austerity? during the recession years, Unicef said.

Britain was even ranked 25th on a child poverty league table of 41 developed countries ? below Romania, Bulgaria and Chile.

Here comes the next left-win United Nations driven guilt trip that’s going to hit the “well off” in the pocket.

In the latest of a succession of highly critical reports about Britain by UN agencies, Unicef said child poverty in the UK increased by 1.6 percentage points between 2008 and 2012 to 25.6 per cent.

Topping a table of countries deemed to have best protected children during the recession was Chile, where child poverty was said to have dropped by 8.6 points.

Common sense tells us that New Zealand and Britain are not countries that have child poverty problems. ?Yet this is a UN-driven invented problem! ? Read more »

Those most in need must come first

? NZ Herald

The NZ Herald editorial identifies that despite all the morning minnies the simple fact remains that those most vulnerable are those most in need. You do have to wonder why we even bother to listen to the UN and their busy-bodies:

In the context of children, that means concentrating funding where it is most needed and most cost-effective. It makes no sense to provide welfare for the comfortably off as well as the most vulnerable if the burden on the budget cripples the economy on which all New Zealanders depend.

The United Nations children’s fund Unicef, which drafted the agencies’ statement, also said that Ms Bennett’s proposals risk “stigmatising” the 15 per cent of children defined as vulnerable. That, again, is a skew-whiff view of the Government’s intent.

The plan is to help these children by identifying them early, devoting extra funding to them, and providing a safe and nurturing environment. It is misguided to confuse this focus with stigmatisation.