At the time of the 1996 census, 48% of those over 15 and 45% of families in Palmerston North had incomes below those specified for the unofficial poverty lines - qualification for the Community Services Card.

The City Council has a number of mechanisms for assisting people on low incomes and it is considered that these could usefully be reviewed to review their application and usefulness.

Examples of such mechanisms are the Recreation Ticket, the duties of Parking Wardens and the way those in financial hardship are treated.
 

This is an excellent programme, and it would be of interest to know how widespread its take up is and the extent to which people use it.

It is currently only available to Community Service Card holders. Research has shown that about a quarter of the people eligible for a Community Services Card do not have one. Extending the criteria to allow all those on low incomes to qualify would be beneficial.

Such a change could be included with a programme to update and add to the number and range of discounted services available and publicity for the scheme in general.
 

Parking Wardens currently have the ability to issue a fine to vehicles with no current warrant of fitness or registration. It is acknowledged that it is important that all vehicles be certified road worthy and are registered. However, both cost money which can be a burden on families under financial stress. The imposition of a sizeable fine will mean that the person or family are much less able to afford the cost of the warrant and registration.

We consider that it would be more useful if vehicles without either a warrant or current registration were given a notice and a warning. This could be followed up with discussions as to how they intend to remedy the situation.

If the objective of the exercise is to get vehicles warranted and registered, the current practice will reduce, not increase, the ability of the person or family on a low income to meet these objectives.
 

In the rates remission and postponement policy adopted by the Council in 1992 there are provisions for dealing with / assisting people suffering financial hardship.

This provision is little known and little exercised. Current circumstances suggest that publicising this policy and developing appropriate procedures for dealing with consequent enquiries is timely.

The provision for a rates rebate for people on a low income is publicised but as the threshold has not been adjusted for many years, it does not offer the relief that it was originally intended to do. The level of the income threshold has been raised before and it is considered that the need to lobby central government for its adjustment back to the earlier relativity level is becoming urgent.

In situations where the person or family does not qualify for the revised relief options above, but is having difficulty paying rates or other dues we consider that systems be put in place that will allow for instalments or other options to be explored before action is taken that will worsen the situation for the person or family.

One such action is that debts are passed to a debt collection agency, increasing the amount involved as well as affecting the person's credit rating. In one case, a person was denied the ability to open a bank account because of an unpaid dog licence.

Such a situation appears to have no desirable outcomes and several undesirable ones.
 

These are only a few of the ways in which the Council could assist the many citizens in the city who are struggling to survive financially.

They involve Council's own programmes and practices. They also, in some cases, the Council taking on its advocacy role on behalf of a significant number of residents.

There will be a number of other ways in which the Council and its officers could assist those on low incomes have a better quality of life to the advantage of all those who live in the city and in furtherance of the City Vision.

Ian Ritchie
Researcher