|
January 4, 2008
Noel Pearson's reform plan in indigenous Cape York Peninsula rejects the existing artificial economy of unconditional welfare. It is paying for abusive lifestyles that compromise the protection of indigenous children and families.
The reform makes welfare payments conditional on four basic expectations: ensure your children attend school; fulfill your responsibilities to keep your children free from abuse and neglect; abide by the laws concerning violence, alcohol and drugs; abide by your public housing tenancy conditions. A family responsibilities commission comprising a magistrate and eminent representatives of the community is to be be created In Queensland to mandate these obligations.
Pearson argues that though these policies have a conservative flavour - a rebuilding of social norms - the other two building blocks of his agenda have a distinctly liberal and social-democratic flavour: realignment of incentives and increased government investment in capability development (that is in developing the capabilities of individuals).
This increased government investment in capability development builds on the work of Amartya Sen, and the argument is that poverty and disadvantage are to a large extent capability deprivation. The key is Indigenous capability development not development purely in terms of GNP growth with poverty seen purely as income-deprivation.
This capability development approach represents a significant policy shift, as the emphasis is not only on how human beings actually function but on them having the capability, which is a practical choice, to function in important ways if they so wish. The emphasis is based on well being and not utility and so it provides a framework for indigenous capability development.
|
The standards that would be an acceptable pass mark for these 4 things would be far below what would be acceptable in white society.
I think it is placing unreal expectations on the abilities of some.
It places too great an emphasis on the parents straightening up and walking right when realistically the children are just as out of control as the parents. Cutting the parents welfare will achieve nothing because all they will have to say is I cant control the kids. Oh OK heres your money.
Things always look good on paper but to implement them is a lot harder.