Downtown Community Ministry
  Wellington Inc.

25 November 1998

Nigel Bick1e
General Manager, Service Delivery Support
Work and Income New Zealand
PO Box  12-136
Wellington

Dear Nigel,

As discussed, enclosed are copies of letters used by local offices to either decline applications for emergency assistance, or refer people directly to food banks.

We are concerned that the practice has again emerged, especially when the department has recently produced a standard letter to be used in all situations when applications for emergency assistance are unsuccessful. A copy of the letter is enclosed.

The letter was produced in order to prevent situations where the department's statutory duty to receive and process applications was in practice being replaced by referrals to food banks. The letter ensures that clear reasons for the decision are conveyed, and offers review rights. Another important aspect to the letter is that food banks are excluded as a party to the decisior. The letter also contains prompts for staff to follow to ensure that other areas of a person's benefit payments are in order.

We are requesting that further instructions are issued to all WINZ offices. The instructions that were sent out previously referred to the letter being used in situations involving food SNGs only, despite it having been agreed that it would be used for all forms of emergency assistance declined on the day of application. The instructions also referred to ensuring that the letter "does not disturb existing arrangements that are working well in other areas". Ironically, the enclosed letters are examples of such existing arrangements, and represent exactly the type of situations the letter was designed to avoid.

It is vitally important for staff at local offices to be aware of the reasons for the letter in terms of the unacceptability for the department to be seen to refer people to food banks. Equally important is the need to make clear the fact that the letter is to be used for all forms of emergency assistance, together with explaining that the reason for the letter is to ensure the maintenance of public service ethics, and that referrals to food banks have in fact appeared to replace the obligation to receive and fully assess applications. Such an explanation being provided to staff would help to create a sense of the wider context in order to avoid what has happened in the past where similar letters have been viewed by staff as if they were to be used as direct referrals to food banks, despite the letter making no reference to a third party, and its inclusion of review rights.

Given the depth of the entrenchment of certain practices and the history behind relationships between local offices and food banks it would be extremely useful to convey to staff information surrounding the wider context in terms of the institutionalisation of food banks, and how both the community and government do not see charity as an acceptable means for the meeting of basic needs. We would be more than willing to assist with this. At the recent food bank conference there were many people from all over the country who were surprised to find that the department did not have a policy of referring people to food banks.

A further problem experienced by a number of groups and which appears to be rife around the country is the omission and often flat refusal of staff to accept formal applications. The issue has been raised with the department at various stages over the years. The department's responses have included denials of the problem due to the clear training all staff have received; debates on what constitutes an application_, and whether the department's definition is consistent with the definition in the Act; and explanations by the department that people often choose not to lodge applications when ineligibility' has been determined. Thus their 'application' is technically an 'inquiry' only, therefore cannot be entered into the formal statistics showing the numbers of declined applications. This creates the grave situation whereby the statistics under report the demand for supplementary assistance therefore reducing he ability for government to accurately monitor the effects of policies, including the adequacy of basic benefit levels.

The department has also over the years invited us to always bring cases where applications have not been received to its attention. However, this invariably allows the problem to be reduced to any particular isolated case when in reality the practice is deeply entrenched and widespread. At the recent national food bank conference community groups were in complete agreement that the magnitude of the problem is huge. For example advocacy groups around the country are now reporting instances of staff. Contacting people to cancel appointments because of the low likelihood of the application being successful. Lack of time is being offered by staff as a reason for refusing to supply written notification of decisions.

A possible explanation for the problem may be seen in information provided to the conference by Social Services Select Committee chairperson Joy McLauchlan. She referred to the fact that while there is no financia1 incentive for Staff to keep total benefit spending down, bonuses are paid to keep administration costs down.

We believe that the latter equates to an incentive to reduce the number of applications received, and provides an explanation for the general dispensing of public service ethics which is currently occurring in the WINZ offices, and being widely reported by groups which have regular dealings with the department.

I hope this information is useful. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss any of the issues we have raised. Please let me know if we can provide anything further or assist in any way.

Yours sincerely