By Jonathan Boston
OPINION: The remarkable South African leader Nelson Mandela once commented "there can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its children".
How might Mandela assess the current state of our nation's soul?
Most likely, he would report a mixed record. No doubt he would be impressed by the commitment of recent governments to reducing child poverty, as reflected in the multi-party support for the Child Poverty Reduction Act (2018) and its related targets and strategies.
Presumably, too, he would commend recent policymakers for their success delivering lower child poverty rates. On virtually all the legislated measures of poverty - whether based on family incomes or material hardship - child poverty rates fell significantly between 2017 and 2022.
Nevertheless, the country remains a long way from meeting the ambitious long-term poverty-reduction targets set for 2028.
These would require child poverty on several key measures falling to about 5-6 percent, roughly half their 2022 rates. If New Zealand met such targets, it would enjoy amongst the lowest child poverty rates in the world.
But how likely is such a prospect? Judging by the inter-party agreements underpinning the new coalition government, it seems further reductions in child poverty are not a priority.
That's not to say all the progress made in recent years will be reversed. After all, the Child Poverty Reduction portfolio has been retained, and the coalition documents don't propose repealing or amending the Child Poverty Reduction Act.
But silence, of course, is not always golden. It can deliberately mask a government's true intentions.
Interestingly, 'poverty' is not mentioned in either of the coalition agreements. Nor are related concepts such as 'hardship', 'deprivation', 'persistent disadvantage', 'exclusion', 'inequality', 'social justice', and 'wellbeing'.
Significantly, too, references to 'children' in the coalition documents are sparse.
The main exception is the welcome commitment of all three parties to "lifting educational achievement so that every child has opportunity to get a world class education". Unquestionably, this is a noble objective.
But children in poor families often find it harder than their better-off peers to seize, and eventually benefit from, such opportunities - a matter upon which the coalition agreements are silent.
In stark contrast, older citizens figure prominently in the new government's policy agenda. Indeed, the coalition agreement between National and New Zealand First includes a separate section entitled 'Seniors' that contains no fewer than 10 specific policy commitments.
The agreement also embraces a commitment to "support seniors by maintaining the Winter Energy Payment, increasing Super every year and boosting it with our tax relief plan, which will see a superannuitant couple get over $600 extra each year".
What do these priorities reveal about our nation's soul - or at least the values of the coalition negotiators?
Aside from the coalition agreements, the fiscal policies of the new government seem destined to increase, rather than reduce, child poverty - at least by some measures.
For instance, the government is committed to reversing the decision of the previous government to link welfare benefits to average wages. Instead, benefits will be indexed to prices, as was previously the case.
Since average wages typically increase at a slightly faster pace than prices, reflecting improvements in labour productivity, the children in beneficiary households will gradually become worse off relative to their counterparts in households where at least one parent is in full-time employment.
The lesson of history is that such disparities often grow to yawning gaps before they are eventually reduced, albeit modestly.
As we enter the Christmas season, it seems appropriate to draw upon another lesson from history - the oft-quoted words of Jesus of Nazareth: "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
To Jesus, children matter and are deserving - universally, without distinction or exception.
Christianity and other philosophical and religious traditions throughout history have maintained that all people, regardless of age, gender or ethnicity, are of equal moral worth and thus deserve equal rights.
This critical ethical conviction is now embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and, for children, underpinned by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
This approach, modelled by Jesus, poses an enduring moral question. Do all our children deserve unhindered acceptance, a sense of belonging and the best society can offer? Or should only some children enjoy such benefits?
There is compelling evidence that childhood poverty, especially when severe or protracted, can cast a long shadow over a person's life - harming their educational attainment, physical and psychological health, employment prospects, and lifetime earnings.
And these negative impacts, in turn, rebound upon society, increasing overall social costs and reducing productivity - so it makes good economic sense to minimise child poverty for our own sakes, if not for others more vulnerable than us.
But surely working to lift children out of poverty is not just financially expedient - it's also what's right.
If we fail to make it a priority, what does it say about our society's soul?
Jonathan Boston is Emeritus Professor of Public Policy at Victoria University of Wellington. He co-chaired the Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty for the Children's Commissioner in 2012-13.
