Anything we can do Oz can do better

Unhappy at inefficient welfare payments?  Getting hot under the collar at Treaty payouts?   Relax, you could be an Australian taxpayer, where for every $250,000 delivered to Aboriginal families it costs $220,000 to deliver it.

I would bet if the same comparison was made here it would alarm and awful lot of people.

I DO not think that welfarism minister Jenny Macklin has yet had the acclaim she deserves for a great Labor achievement announced this week – that government spending on indigenous Australians has reached, in average, about $250,000 per Aboriginal family a year. Macklin’s own solid contribution has been to increase this sum by about 10 per cent, or $25,000 a family, since Julia Gillard took Labor into minority government.

This, in the right hands, would be more than enough to put every Aboriginal child in a top GPS private school – indeed boarding schools for the remote-living ones, plus full private health insurance, flash cars, rentals or mortgages in the better suburbs and, probably, pheasant under glass for dinner every other day. Even if a proportion squandered a bit on grog and drugs, as some politicians do, there would probably be enough left over to ensure that no one was undernourished.

All that stands between now and this ideal state of affairs is the passage of most of this money directly to Aborigines, instead of the present system, which sees the transition ”mediated” by white public servants at a cost, per Aboriginal family, of an average of about $220,000 a year. Under Macklin, the Aboriginal family averages only about $30,000, and, for many, even the spending of that is carefully and paternalistically ”managed” by Auntie Jenny.

There are, on average, nearly two non-Aboriginal public servants ministering to the ”needs” of Aboriginal people for every Aboriginal family. That may be as many as 100,000 people, once one counts or fractions in health workers, teachers, policemen, social workers and the risk managers, bookkeepers, equal opportunity officers, army public relations people, human resource managers and co-ordinators-general required to keep their shows on the road.

In some regions, such as the Northern Territory, and the more rural parts of NSW, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia, white folk living off the dollar generated by Aboriginal need is what passes as industry.

These selfless people cannot do it in a vacuum, of course. They require Toyotas, computers, housing, water, sewerage, hardship allowances, guarantees of personal safety and so on – all indeed before any such things are delivered to the subjects of their attentions. Who could begrudge them? That spending activity – again going almost invariably to non-Aborigines – creates, as in Canberra, a ”private sector” of accountants, dentists, union organisers, Labor members of parliament and so on, to service them. A wonderful system, the more so for the moral certainty of its current administrators, that they know best, that their measures are saving one half of each family from the other half, that they are, somehow, in a process of ”weaning” these overdependent people from their addiction to welfare and sitting down, and that they are also Closing The Gap on Aboriginal disadvantage. Each debatable.

Have a look at Family Start in South Auckland…and you will see exactly the same bullshit happening here.

  • Flipper

    Yep, not a good look.
    And we should NOT forget some NZ home truths when politicians promise to increase spending, taxes or both.
    The Treasury and IRD agree that for every dollar ($) levied in tax, oinly 78c is available to the Government after the cost of collection, administration and policy rubbish. It is worse for Government funded projects,. The cost loading is 52%. So only 48 % of, say, every $100 million, actually produces a return to taxpayers.

    • parorchestia

      Not only that, but government expenditures are most often on non-productive activities (Working for Families anyone?). EG. Vogel is often praised as establishing NZ Rail. He didn’t. It was flourishing under private enterprise well before his time as Premier. And his efforts were strongly and rightly criticised by commentators at the time as being far too extravagant. He borrowed, but didn’t spend anything in some years, thus burdening NZ with a debt we found difficult to service.
      Rail certainly would have been better left to private enterprise. The Canterbury and Otago/Southland rail system made a profit until they were nationalised. How many times do we have to learn the lessons of history?

  • 2ndAmendment

    So let’s think this through:
    * we can’t give it to them with directive oversight & accountability from (white) bureaucrats because the overheads are too big.
    * we can’t give it ti Maori / Aboriginal organizations because those organizations don’t have sufficient oversight / accountability
    * we can’t give it directly to Maori / Aboriginal families because they’ll spend it on booze and drugs
    * we can’t give food stamps / restricted use cash cards to Maori / Aboriginal families because they’ll buy food and then trade it for booze and drugs, not feeding their kids.

    Hmm: what does that leave? Only one option: don’t give them any money

    But I can hear the commies yell “That’s not fair!!” — and you know what? They’re right. It wouldn’t be fair not to give money to white beneficiaries, or white students, or (especially) white pensioners and not do the same for Maori / Aboriginal families

    So how can we square that circle?

    Turns out to be really, really, easy: don’t give money to anyone

    Welfare: we can’t afford it, it’s all borrowed money, we must just stop.

  • cows4me

    It’s only a matter of time before the house of cards built up by successive governments comes crashing down. Welfarism isn’t a problem to government, it’s a revenue earner. How many parasites handle our tax dollars and take their cut out before it reaches it’s intended beneficiaries, must be billions. Our real problems aren’t the poor or the unemployed it’s the fucked up system. The only hope the the system might return to some sort of default setting will be for the country to become insolvent, they seem to be working to these ends in earnest.

  • Steve and Monique

    Guess the Abo were indigenous,and were treated like shit by the settlers who turned up,including being hunted,and I dont think they signed a treaty And we got the Maori,who were not idigenous.And how much does it cost here to deliver welfare to our lot?,including treaty/health issues.Hmmm must be a better way on both sides of the ditch

  • parorchestia

    The greatest progress made by individual Aborigine communities are where the community has taken action collectively to ban alcohol and institute community efforts to look after children and other dependents and their children’s education. They do not seek, or need, state support.
    I was in the Northern Territories when the Whitlam gruberment extended welfare to all aborigines. The result was disastrous. On Thursday, pay day, they collected their cash ($35 pp p week from memory – a not insignificant sum) and headed for the pub, where “Abo” bars were common. These were lined with bare concrete enabling the proprietor to hose down floors and wall after hours. The “Abos” rapidly became drunk and fought each other in savage contests the like of which I have never seen before.
    The local cops could not rely on the courts, so they took their lives in their hands (literally) and subdued the warring factions (by hitting them with batons in the stomach – the Aborigines’ only weak spot), loading them into cages on the back of trucks and taking them 80 miles or so into the desert. They would be sober when they returned. Whitlam’s policy was of the type “it seemed like a good idea at the time” sort that socialists are so fond of. It destroyed the Aborigine people.
    Now, true Aborigine leaders know what the answer is and are, in places, applying it. The government would be advised to butt out but help set up self-help systems.

91%