<\/p>\n
\nPhoto: RNZ\n<\/p>\n
Families with disabled children are facing reductions in support under new rules that include income from boarders in assessments for accommodation supplements or income-related rent in public housing.<\/p>\n
Before 2 March, only income from three or more boarders was included.<\/p>\n
Minister for Social Development Louise Upston said, when the change was announced in the 2024 Budget, it was simplifying inconsistent treatment of board and rent payments.<\/p>\n
It was expected that of the 8200 households who received the accommodation supplement and have boarders, about 7000 would have a reduction in support, of an average $100 a week.<\/p>\n
About 6200 social housing households receiving board payments were expected to be affected, with an average rent increase of $132 a week.<\/p>\n
Some families said that boarding situations were commonly used when adult children were living at home – sometimes because they could not move out.<\/p>\n
“I’ve got a daughter with special needs who will never move out because she’s not capable of doing anything for herself,” one mother, Cheryl said.<\/p>\n
“She’s fully dependent so now with the new laws because she’s 18, she gets her own benefit, her board money is now considered an income for me.<\/p>\n
“Thankfully we live in the middle of nowhere so our mortgage is cheaper than what people are paying in rent. But people that are paying more would be affected drastically … my girl is non verbal … she’s under 50kg.<\/p>\n
“Although she pays rent it mostly goes on food to try and fatten her up and get her over 50kg. It’s not really spent on a roof over her head.”<\/p>\n
The potential for disabled people and young people to be more affected was highlighted in a supplementary analysis report by MSD.<\/p>\n
University of Auckland associate professor Susan St John said the change had happened with “remarkably little scrutiny”.<\/p>\n
She said people who were hosting homestay students would also be affected.<\/p>\n
“It’s one of those changes that have been rushed through and was designed to save a paltry amount of money, $160 million over four years.<\/p>\n
“We don’t know even whether it’s going to save that because of the behavioural change. People will just find it is not worthwhile to take on boarders … it’s a very complicated, punitive, discouraging kind of policy.”<\/p>\n
Green Party spokesperson Ricardo Mendendez March said the policy made it harder for people who were already struggling.<\/p>\n
“This is why this policy was never about fairness, but about finding ways to save money, which is explicitly named in the government budget as basically a cost-saving measure.<\/p>\n
“Our concern is that at a time of high unemployment, at a time of a cost of living crisis and the fuel crisis bout to make life harder for everyday people, that we’re about to see people whose ability to make ends meet will be made a lot harder due to their inability to claim the full amount for the accommodation supplement as they would have been able to do so previously.”<\/p>\n
Upston said in a press release at the time the change was announced that it supported the Government’s aim of making public services fiscally sustainable and effective.<\/p>\n
“We believe that those who have a genuine need should be able to get the help they require while ensuring consistency across MSD payments,” Upston said.<\/p>\n