The DPB statutory benefit was passed into legislation in 1973, under an incoming Labour government. But it was pushed along by a National MP Lance Adams-Schneider's private member's bill under debate at the time.
That's why I wrote to Leighton Smith today that the DPB was introduced by a National govt.
I should have been clearer. And I should not rely on my memory:-)
Don W picked it up and Leighton didn't have time to read my clarification.
The subject of the DPB was under discussion because of a campaign launched by Auckland Action Against Poverty to have the penalty against sole parents on welfare who refuse to name the father of their child abolished.
If the business of naming the father is genuinely troublesome (the child is the result of rape or incest) Work and Income will not apply the penalty.
However there is also a dodge that goes on which the bureaucracy tries to discourage.
Current law requires the naming of fathers in order to collect Child Support from him. By not naming the father, the mother colludes to help him avoid paying Child Support which, if she is on welfare, is kept by the state to offset the benefit cost. In return the father agrees to pay her a lesser sum than Child Support but higher than the penalty. So both win.
Of course AAAP wouldn't have a problem with this. They are happy for the 'downtrodden' of any hue to rip off the 'neoliberal' welfare system.
Do they comprehend that these sorts of campaigns actually hurt the poor by hardening voter attitudes?