Commissioner, I read your comments last week, addressed to politicians of all parties that "now was the time to make ending child poverty a project of the very highest national significance, because New Zealand children cannot wait any longer".
On the same day that I read your article, I received this message: "Hi Ian, while I admire your current campaign, I struggle with the idea. It’s a bandaid on a weeping wound. Maori, Polynesian and my group, the white trash, are simply breeding the poverty you are trying to cure. My wife and I have in the last 10 years paid hundreds and hundreds of thousands in tax. Why should some loser who has contributed nothing expect us to give more? I admire your small attempt to do something but, in my opinion, it’s only rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. They simply have to stop breeding kids they can’t afford."
Commissioner, your call for child poverty to become a project of national significance was in response to statistics which showed 156,000 children living in "material hardship" and that the government had missed all three of its child poverty targets.
The message I received, and there were many others in a similar vein, was in response to the Share My Super campaign, which simply asks: "if you can share some or all of your super then, together, we can make a difference for our forgotten moko."
And that is the point that has been lost entirely on those who have asked: "why should we donate money to those sitting on their arses smoking dope and not looking for a job?" (I got that message as well.)
I am sure you will agree — that’s the wrong question. This is about the children. This is about those who have been born into a life they simply do not understand. This is about our forgotten moko, across all cultures, who only ever get one childhood.
This about the 12 charities that Share My Super has identified as making a difference to the 156,000 Kiwi kids who are living in poverty. That is a large number, and "living in material hardship" is a euphemistic phrase that describes the box that we can conveniently drop those children into and ignore until this time next year.
This is about the grandmother I learnt about who had to make the decision every day as to whether she cooked a hot meal for her two grandchildren, that she was now caring for, or turned on the heating in their bedroom. She could not afford to do both.
I simply cannot comprehend that level of poverty. One hundred and fifty-six thousand is a shameful number, but the sound of the chattering teeth of your two moko in a freezing bedroom is heartbreaking.
But commissioner, while politicians engage in blame games that will delay any real change, we can act now.
Each year the government allocates between $18 billion-$20b in superannuation. We know that for 40% of superannuitants this is their only form of income, and for another 20%-30%, it is an essential top-up to whatever savings they might have. They need that money.
But what if we could find just 1% of those eligible for super who might not need it at the moment. One percent who could donate some, or all, of their super to be shared across 12 frontline charities.
That 1% could raise between $100m-$150m every year that would go directly to those charities. Not a single dollar is retained by Share My Super.
You can donate as much or as little as you can comfortably afford and, should your circumstances change, you can stop the donations immediately, no questions asked.
So commissioner, let’s work together to see if we can find that 1% who can make a difference. While we will certainly find people out there who will blame those "dope-smoking parents" as their reason not to join us, I have been overwhelmed by the good people, across all walks of life, who have responded.
Good people like the 64-year-old who asked if she could share part of a small allowance she had until she could offer a little more next year when she got her super. Or the electrician with two children who has donated $10 a week because he, too, believes that no child should live without the basics.
And to the person at the beginning who asked why should some loser who has contributed nothing expect us to give more, perhaps this message left on the Share my Super website might give him pause.
"Here is an organisation that not only directs the full amount of donations to good causes, it also focuses on one of my key objectives, being that of sharing the available funds amongst a number of worthy causes, not just one. Best of all it does the ‘donkey work’ of regularly monitoring their progress. Share My Super must be unique in this regard."
So commissioner, I ask only one thing of you. Can you help us spread the message? We need to find that 1% and you are in a great position to help us. We can’t wait for politicians to do it.
Something those politicians might like to think about is sharing a percentage of the pay rise they are scheduled to receive between now and the next Stats New Zealand report on Child Poverty in 2026.
That pay rise will mean the lowest salary paid to a politician will be $181,200 a year. None of them will have to choose between cooking a meal or turning off their heating.
Maybe they could also agree that commitment would stay in place until they have solved the unacceptable level of child poverty. I look forward to hearing any of them discussing this option when they return to the debating chamber.
— Sir Ian Taylor is founder and managing director of Dunedin company Animation Research.
