Hearld / Judith Collins attack dads
? The Sunday Hearld and Auntie Judith? a at it again.
So lets look at the quality of Journalism that the Sunday Herald provides in this article.
Stephen Cook showcases how lamentable the quality of journalism on Child Support Tax debt actually is.
——
1) Focusing on “387 fathers” who are alleged to owe “6.3 in Child Support” is a good example of? tabloid statistics. There are 123,134 parents who IRD consider in debt? and this sensationalist journalism “rich dads owe millions” focuses on 0.3143% of this population excluding the other 97.7%
—–?
2) Granny Herald continues to ? promote Auntie Judy’s claim there is over 1 billion in Child Support Tax owed. This claim is incorrect and a quick search of Google reveals “The latest figures for child support debt nationally show that the total is just over $1 billion, with unpaid penalties making up about $640 million of that.”
The reality is that child support tax owed is about 360 Million. Number two example of the failure of Granny Heralds “journalist”, Stephen Cook to do conduct any basic research and analysis? before publication. Penalties go to the crown as will the bulk of the “debt”. Very little of any money collected will go to children.
——
3) I must ask where the balance in this artilce is. Where is the interview with the mother who earned over 100K and was placed into debt by IRD misadministration? This person is real, but was the “journalist” interested? No, looking at the root cause of the failure of this legislation for both paying and reciving parents is beyond the tabloid press brief.
Who was quoted? An IRD Spokespersom, whats the name of the offical? An Auckland mother, related to the journalist perhaps? Judith Collin a National MP? who should employ a decent analyst. Where is the balance?
——-
4)? Would not the basic question to be asked in an article that slams as deadbeat any parent who is “in debt” for child support tax be : Whyare 72% of parents who pay child support tax in debt ??
——?
5) Judith Collins, representing the National Party, is following in the footsteps of a campgain begun by Katherine Rich? is seeking to reduce the publics perception of any parent who owes a child support tax debt as a deadbeat dad, depriving their children of? the support they are entitled to.? These errant parents will be forced into line when the National Party takes control.?
Now surely any reporter would have sought more information on these 387 fathers before he reacged a conclusion that tey are deadbeat.
How many of these parents are in “debt” as a result of IRD’s admoinistration of the Act?
How many parents in this group have had an unrealistic payment level set in the secret administrative review tribunal?
How many of these parents are making compulsory student loan repayments.
How many of these parents have been a;llenated from the children they are levied for?
How many of these parents are making payments agreed to with IRD to repay the? “debt”?
Why do 387 parents owe 6.3 million dollars?
That represents an average debt of of about $162,000.
This should be demanding some investigative journalism!Any improvement reuires that the root cause or causes not chasing symptoms. The “debt is a symptom” of fundemtal flaws in the underlying legislation.
This legislation is not serving parents or their children and the best the? “journalists ” can come up with is? National Party Spin?
It would be nice to see a journalist who had the? “balls” to report the real story of Child Support Tax in this country.
? ? ? ?
The further demonizing of fatherhood. Keep providing the disincentives to fatherhoood and with the male pill soon upon us watch family formation and birth rates plummet.
Comment by Stephen — Sun 22nd October 2006 @ 2:22 pm
(cc of feedback to Stephen Cook)
Your article is very one sided and delivers nothing new. It would be refreshing to have an article on the custodial or prime care parent who is required to pay Child Support for children in their care as the other parent was first to get to the DPB?
Or the parent who paid their Child Support in full while caring for their children in a 60/40 arrangement but continued to get bills for Child Support and non-payment notices for a year.
Or the parent who can not get Working for families as only one parent may receive welfare.
and so-on.
Research the facts – there a hundreds if not thousands in this position. Be more interesting – Judith Collins is handing you a smelly fish that has been well picked dry.
Cheers
Nik
Comment by Nik — Sun 22nd October 2006 @ 6:54 pm
And we would expect anything different from the NZ Herald because?
Or any change by Collins who has shown her true colours in a number of past instances.
All very well to mis-name a tax law (i.e. Crown Revenue) as “child support”, but for Collins to so blatantly and stupidly keep coming back to the “dead-beat Dad” routine just showcases her abject stupidity and complete ineptitude!
Comment by Ethos — Sun 22nd October 2006 @ 9:48 pm
I agree, this is a totally one sided article. Alot of fathers, me included have their own families to support now. How IRD came up with the current formula is beyond me. And they don’t give us a chance to better ourselves because whenever we get a payrise, our child support just increases the following year.
It doesn’t mention about the “deadbeat” mothers out there taking the system for a ride.
My ex wife has just moved in with her partner but my daughter has been living with her grandmother for 11 weeks, yet I still have to pay child support for her doing nothing. It just makes me sick and plus she didn’t tell them she was coming off the DPB straight away either so she was ripping off the system twice.
When are the fathers in this country going to get a fair go?
Comment by Stephen — Tue 24th October 2006 @ 3:48 pm