Yes. That's right.
CPAG's usual complaint is that NZ looks after the elderly far better than it does children.
"We could reduce child poverty dramatically if we choose to, just as we have done for elderly people."And, Susan St John quoting Jonathan Boston:
From the health spokeswoman for CPAG:
Contrast that to today's complaint against the state's apparently discriminatory position that, "... the Government expects married people to share resources and support each other."
Back to the article:
Tom has been a good citizen and lived here all his life and expects to get the married rate of New Zealand Superannuation at age 65.What if Tom had been a bad citizen? Why bring his deserving status into it when usually CPAG rail against that principle:
I suppose they are at least being consistent in calling for more tax-payer funding to address their latest chosen cause.