Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:06:09 +1300
Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19971013121210.27875f08@mailserv.waikato.ac.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu
From: Maxine Campbell <maxine@waikato.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: welfare fraud (fwd)
Hi Mirelle

As usual, there is unending argument when it comes to the validity of stats.
Here in NZ a recent newspaper article by a local politician quoted a welfare
fraud figure of around the 1% you quoted.  My reaction to that was "if only
big business was so lucky - or any employer, come to that!  It seems to me
that 1% dishonety in any enterprise is very low.  A few weeks after the
publication of that article I was summonsed by the local welfare branch to
come in for an audit (I am a single parent in receipt of a partial benefit).
At the interview I was told that benefit fraud was up around 30% or more.
When I pressed for the source of the figure, it turned out it was no more
than "Opinion", and the audit process, of which I was a part, was instituted
to attempt to determine the level of welfare fraud. 

While the methodology itself may be cause for concern, even greater problems
would seem to be associated with what appears to be an intention to provide
the stats to back up the opinion.  The political and social climate in NZ at
the moment is very much imbued with a "user pays", "individual
responsiblilty", "free market" philosophy, and any means by which welfare
spending can be reduced (and recipients further stigmatised) tends to be not
only welcomed, but accepted as an imperative.  I fully expect that the
figures produced by the research will say exactly what those in power want
them to say.

I'm afraid I am unable to supply any research results, and even if I could,
I would probably be sceptical of them.  The real point, I think, is that
there is no research that I am aware of that suggests that welfare
recipients are any more prone to fraud than other sectors of the community -
though they may be more desperate.  On the other hand, they face (at least
in NZ) more checks and balances on their honesty than do, say, employees.
There will, off course, always be those who rip the system off regardless of
their degree of desperation, and I suspect that they would do the same to
employers and the taxman.  The difference seems to be that when the
fraudster is a beneficiary the mud sticks to all beneficiaries, while if
they are employees or tax dodgers, other employees and taxpayers are not
tarred with the same brush.

Cheers, Maxine

>
Maxine Campbell			email: maxine@waikato.ac.nz
Sociology Department		Phone: 0064-7-8562889, ex 8274
University of Waikato		Home:  0064-7-8547103
Hamilton			Fax:   0064-7-8562158
New Zealand