Latest news with #IntegratedDataInfrastructure
Scoop
3 days ago
- Health
- Scoop
New Research Shows Poverty Hitting Intellectually Disabled New Zealanders The Hardest
A new IHC report reveals that New Zealanders with an intellectual disability are twice as likely to live in hardship or severe hardship compared to the rest of the population. IHC Advocate Shara Turner says the report, The Cost of Exclusion: Hardship and People with Intellectual Disability in New Zealand, shows this is a deep, systemic issue. 'The cost of disability is real and it's falling entirely on individuals and families who are often excluded from work, transport and even food. 'It is not acceptable that people with intellectual disabilities can't afford a healthy diet. 'It's also unacceptable that this is not part of national conversations on poverty. 'We need to include intellectual disability in all poverty tracking and public reporting. We need to adjust income support to reflect the true cost of disability and to build joined-up systems that recognise the long-term, cross-sector disadvantage disabled people experience.' The report shows that people with intellectual disability face significantly higher rates of hardship at every stage of life: Hardship is twice as likely for people with an intellectual disability under 40 and almost three times as likely for those aged 40-64 compared to others Severe hardship rates triple in middle age, even as they decline for the rest of the population Nearly 50% of people with intellectual disability cannot pay an unavoidable bill within a month without borrowing (vs. 18% of others) They are over four times more likely to go without a meal with meat (or vegetarian protein equivalent) every second day They are almost three times more likely to cut back on fresh fruit and vegetables due to cost Nearly 30% of children with intellectual disability can't have friends over for a meal due to cost Children with intellectual disability are also over twice as likely to not have daily access to fresh food and are 6.5 times more likely to miss out on school events for the same reason. The report was completed for IHC by Kōtātā researchers Keith McLeod and Luisa Beltran-Castillon, and Geoff Stone from Ripple Research. They interviewed people with an intellectual disability and their families, and extracted data about the outcomes of people with intellectual disability from the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), one of the more comprehensive linked datasets in the world. The IDI holds de-identified data on nine million individuals in New Zealand, dating back to 1840, collected from government agencies, surveys and non-governmental organisations over many years.
RNZ News
04-05-2025
- RNZ News
This NZ law aims to give people with criminal convictions a 'clean slate'. It's not working
By Alexander Plum, Kabir Dasgupta* of Photo: 123RF Analysis - If you own a business, would you be willing to hire a person who has been convicted of a crime? Give them a chance when a background check shows they have a criminal record? The answers matter for both individuals and communities. For people who have paid their debt to society, rejoining it can hinge on getting a second chance without being judged on their past. It is not something they can really hide. Employers often conduct criminal background checks as part of the hiring process. People with criminal records face high levels of stigmatisation, making it harder to reenter their communities and make money legally. The thorny question of what to do with people with convictions when it comes to employment has been considered by policymakers and justice campaigners around the world. In the United States, more than 27 states have introduced "Ban the Box" legislation. While each law is unique, by and large, they have eliminated the requirement to provide criminal background information in job applications. And a number of countries, including New Zealand, have implemented clean slate initiatives which help conceal criminal records for people who meet certain criteria. Our new research looks at whether New Zealand's clean slate scheme increases the job prospects for eligible people. The clean slate reform was introduced as the Criminal Records Act in 2004. People who were previously convicted of minor offences can now have their criminal records automatically concealed if they can maintain a conviction-free record for seven years after their last sentence. The regulation excludes people who were involved in a serious offence (such as sexual misconduct) or who received a particularly punitive sentence (such as incarceration or an indefinite disqualification from driving). Our research started with the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), hosted by Statistics New Zealand (StatsNZ). This is a repository of records provided by different public and private agencies, including court charge data from the Ministry of Justice and tax records from Inland Revenue. StatsNZ uses specific characteristics of individuals (such as name and birth date) to identify them across the different datasets. This enables researchers to track the same individual's data footprint across different administrative records. We used court charges data on all men convicted between 1992 and 2003 who had fulfilled the clean slate eligibility criteria. We then linked this pool of people with their Inland Revenue records to measure their employment and earnings. To identify the labour market impact of the clean slate policy, we compared the employment and earnings of those who completed their seven-year rehabilitation period (the treatment group) with individuals who became eligible sometime later (the control group). Our analysis found the clean slate scheme has no relevant impact on the likelihood of eligible individuals finding work. This could result from the length of time required between sentencing and being eligible for a clean slate. Seven years could simply be too long. But the clean slate scheme did create at least a 2 percent increase in eligible workers' monthly wages and salaries - equivalent to a NZ$100 hike for an individual with an average monthly salary of $5000. The increase in monthly earnings appears to be greater for workers with a stronger commitment to working and for those who remain with one company for longer periods. The labour market effects of concealing past convictions have also been explored in the US. Recent research looked at a policy enacted in Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Bexar County, Texas. Mirroring our own results, the authors do not find any relevant impact on gaining employment. Our findings indicate the concealment of past convictions through New Zealand's clean slate scheme might happen too late to make a huge difference. But there are changes that can be made to improve work outcomes for people who have completed their sentences. This could include following the example of countries such as Finland, where access to criminal histories is much more restricted. In Finland, the background check has to be directly relevant to the job requirements. For example, the law allows checks for someone applying to work in the financial sector who was convicted of fraud. There would also be benefits from looking at the eligibility criteria for New Zealand's clean slate scheme. Currently, it only applies to people who committed a minor offence. But, policymakers should consider whether it makes sense to expand the policy to people who committed more serious crimes but managed to turn their lives around. Making this change would allow people to reap the benefits of working without stigma. All that said, the government's current "tough on crime" stance makes change unlikely, with a focus on the cost of crime rather than what happens after punishment has been completed. * Alexander Plum is a Senior Research Fellow, Auckland University of Technology; Kabir Dasgupta is a Research Associate, Auckland University of Technology - This story was first published by The Conversation.
Scoop
03-05-2025
- Scoop
This NZ Law Aims To Give People With Criminal Convictions A ‘Clean Slate'. It's Not Working
New Zealands clean slate scheme is meant to let people leave their criminal past behind. But people are waiting seven years to leave their past behind, hurting their job prospects. If you own a business, would you be willing to hire a person who has been convicted for a crime? Give them a chance when a background check shows they have a criminal record? The answers matter for both individuals and communities. For people who have paid their debt to society, rejoining it can hinge on getting a second chance without being judged on their past. It is not something they can really hide. Employers often conduct criminal background checks as part of the hiring process. People with criminal records face high levels of stigmatisation, making it harder to reenter their communities and make money legally. The thorny question of what to do with people with convictions when it comes to employment has been considered by policymakers and justice campaigners around the world. In the United States, more than 27 states have introduced ' Ban the Box ' legislation. While each law is unique, by and large they have eliminated the requirement to provide criminal background information in job applications. And a number of countries, including New Zealand, have implemented clean slate initiatives which help conceal criminal records for people who meet certain criteria. Our new research looks at whether New Zealand's clean slate scheme increases the job prospects for eligible people. The clean slate reform was introduced as the Criminal Records Act in 2004. People who were previously convicted of minor offences can now have their criminal records automatically concealed if they can maintain a conviction-free record for seven years after their last sentence. The regulation excludes people who were involved in a serious offence (such as sexual misconduct) or who received a particularly punitive sentence (such as incarceration or an indefinite disqualification from driving). Clean slate and the labour market Our research started with the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), hosted by Statistics New Zealand (StatsNZ). This is a repository of records provided by different public and private agencies, including court charge data from the Ministry of Justice and tax records from Inland Revenue. StatsNZ uses specific characteristics of individuals (such as name and birth date) to identify them across the different datasets. This enables researchers to track the same individual's data footprint across different administrative records. We used court charges data on all men convicted between 1992 and 2003 who had fulfilled the clean slate eligibility criteria. We then linked this pool of people with their Inland Revenue records to measure their employment and earnings. To identify the labour market impact of the clean slate policy, we compared the employment and earnings of those who completed their seven-year rehabilitation period (the treatment group) with individuals who become eligible some time later (control group). Limited benefits of clean slate scheme Our analysis found the clean slate scheme has no relevant impact on the likelihood of eligible individuals finding work. This could result from the length of time required between sentencing and being eligible for a clean slate. Seven years could simply be too long. But the clean slate scheme did create at least a 2% increase in eligible workers' monthly wages and salaries – equivalent to a NZ$100 hike for an individual with an average monthly salary of $5,000. The increase in monthly earnings appears to be greater for workers with a stronger commitment to working and for those who remain with one company for longer periods. Global patterns The labour market effects of concealing past convictions have also been explored in the US. Recent research looked at a policy enacted in Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Bexar County, Texas. Mirroring our own results, the authors do not find any relevant impact on gaining employment. Our findings indicate the concealment of past convictions through New Zealand's clean slate scheme might happen too late to make a huge difference. But there are changes that can be made to improve work outcomes for people who have completed their sentences. This could include following the example of countries such as Finland, where access to criminal histories is much more restricted. In Finland, the background check has to be directly relevant to the job requirements. For example, the law allows checks for someone applying to work in the financial sector who was convicted of fraud. There would also be benefits from looking at the eligibility criteria for New Zealand's clean slate scheme. Currently, it only applies to people who committed a minor offence. But policymakers should consider whether it makes sense to expand the policy to people who committed more serious crimes but managed to turn their life around. Making this change would allow people to reap the benefits of working without stigma. All that said, the government's current 'tough on crime' stance makes change unlikely, with a focus on the cost of crime rather than what happens after punishment has been completed. Disclosure statement Kabir Dasgupta is affiliated with the Federal Reserve Board. The opinions expressed in this article does not reflect the views of the the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Reserve System. Alexander Plum does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Scoop
03-05-2025
- Scoop
This NZ Law Aims To Give People With Criminal Convictions A ‘Clean Slate'. It's Not Working
Article – The Conversation New Zealands clean slate scheme is meant to let people leave their criminal past behind. But people are waiting seven years to leave their past behind, hurting their job prospects. If you own a business, would you be willing to hire a person who has been convicted for a crime? Give them a chance when a background check shows they have a criminal record? The answers matter for both individuals and communities. For people who have paid their debt to society, rejoining it can hinge on getting a second chance without being judged on their past. It is not something they can really hide. Employers often conduct criminal background checks as part of the hiring process. People with criminal records face high levels of stigmatisation, making it harder to reenter their communities and make money legally. The thorny question of what to do with people with convictions when it comes to employment has been considered by policymakers and justice campaigners around the world. In the United States, more than 27 states have introduced ' Ban the Box ' legislation. While each law is unique, by and large they have eliminated the requirement to provide criminal background information in job applications. And a number of countries, including New Zealand, have implemented clean slate initiatives which help conceal criminal records for people who meet certain criteria. Our new research looks at whether New Zealand's clean slate scheme increases the job prospects for eligible people. The clean slate reform was introduced as the Criminal Records Act in 2004. People who were previously convicted of minor offences can now have their criminal records automatically concealed if they can maintain a conviction-free record for seven years after their last sentence. The regulation excludes people who were involved in a serious offence (such as sexual misconduct) or who received a particularly punitive sentence (such as incarceration or an indefinite disqualification from driving). Clean slate and the labour market Our research started with the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), hosted by Statistics New Zealand (StatsNZ). This is a repository of records provided by different public and private agencies, including court charge data from the Ministry of Justice and tax records from Inland Revenue. StatsNZ uses specific characteristics of individuals (such as name and birth date) to identify them across the different datasets. This enables researchers to track the same individual's data footprint across different administrative records. We used court charges data on all men convicted between 1992 and 2003 who had fulfilled the clean slate eligibility criteria. We then linked this pool of people with their Inland Revenue records to measure their employment and earnings. To identify the labour market impact of the clean slate policy, we compared the employment and earnings of those who completed their seven-year rehabilitation period (the treatment group) with individuals who become eligible some time later (control group). Limited benefits of clean slate scheme Our analysis found the clean slate scheme has no relevant impact on the likelihood of eligible individuals finding work. This could result from the length of time required between sentencing and being eligible for a clean slate. Seven years could simply be too long. But the clean slate scheme did create at least a 2% increase in eligible workers' monthly wages and salaries – equivalent to a NZ$100 hike for an individual with an average monthly salary of $5,000. The increase in monthly earnings appears to be greater for workers with a stronger commitment to working and for those who remain with one company for longer periods. Global patterns The labour market effects of concealing past convictions have also been explored in the US. Recent research looked at a policy enacted in Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Bexar County, Texas. Mirroring our own results, the authors do not find any relevant impact on gaining employment. Our findings indicate the concealment of past convictions through New Zealand's clean slate scheme might happen too late to make a huge difference. But there are changes that can be made to improve work outcomes for people who have completed their sentences. This could include following the example of countries such as Finland, where access to criminal histories is much more restricted. In Finland, the background check has to be directly relevant to the job requirements. For example, the law allows checks for someone applying to work in the financial sector who was convicted of fraud. There would also be benefits from looking at the eligibility criteria for New Zealand's clean slate scheme. Currently, it only applies to people who committed a minor offence. But policymakers should consider whether it makes sense to expand the policy to people who committed more serious crimes but managed to turn their life around. Making this change would allow people to reap the benefits of working without stigma. All that said, the government's current 'tough on crime' stance makes change unlikely, with a focus on the cost of crime rather than what happens after punishment has been completed. Disclosure statement Kabir Dasgupta is affiliated with the Federal Reserve Board. The opinions expressed in this article does not reflect the views of the the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Reserve System. Alexander Plum does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Scoop
03-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
This NZ Law Aims To Give People With Criminal Convictions A ‘Clean Slate'. It's Not Working
Article – The Conversation If you own a business, would you be willing to hire a person who has been convicted for a crime? Give them a chance when a background check shows they have a criminal record? The answers matter for both individuals and communities. For people who have paid their debt to society, rejoining it can hinge on getting a second chance without being judged on their past. It is not something they can really hide. Employers often conduct criminal background checks as part of the hiring process. People with criminal records face high levels of stigmatisation, making it harder to reenter their communities and make money legally. The thorny question of what to do with people with convictions when it comes to employment has been considered by policymakers and justice campaigners around the world. In the United States, more than 27 states have introduced ' Ban the Box ' legislation. While each law is unique, by and large they have eliminated the requirement to provide criminal background information in job applications. And a number of countries, including New Zealand, have implemented clean slate initiatives which help conceal criminal records for people who meet certain criteria. Our new research looks at whether New Zealand's clean slate scheme increases the job prospects for eligible people. The clean slate reform was introduced as the Criminal Records Act in 2004. People who were previously convicted of minor offences can now have their criminal records automatically concealed if they can maintain a conviction-free record for seven years after their last sentence. The regulation excludes people who were involved in a serious offence (such as sexual misconduct) or who received a particularly punitive sentence (such as incarceration or an indefinite disqualification from driving). Clean slate and the labour market Our research started with the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), hosted by Statistics New Zealand (StatsNZ). This is a repository of records provided by different public and private agencies, including court charge data from the Ministry of Justice and tax records from Inland Revenue. StatsNZ uses specific characteristics of individuals (such as name and birth date) to identify them across the different datasets. This enables researchers to track the same individual's data footprint across different administrative records. We used court charges data on all men convicted between 1992 and 2003 who had fulfilled the clean slate eligibility criteria. We then linked this pool of people with their Inland Revenue records to measure their employment and earnings. To identify the labour market impact of the clean slate policy, we compared the employment and earnings of those who completed their seven-year rehabilitation period (the treatment group) with individuals who become eligible some time later (control group). Limited benefits of clean slate scheme Our analysis found the clean slate scheme has no relevant impact on the likelihood of eligible individuals finding work. This could result from the length of time required between sentencing and being eligible for a clean slate. Seven years could simply be too long. But the clean slate scheme did create at least a 2% increase in eligible workers' monthly wages and salaries – equivalent to a NZ$100 hike for an individual with an average monthly salary of $5,000. The increase in monthly earnings appears to be greater for workers with a stronger commitment to working and for those who remain with one company for longer periods. Global patterns The labour market effects of concealing past convictions have also been explored in the US. Recent research looked at a policy enacted in Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Bexar County, Texas. Mirroring our own results, the authors do not find any relevant impact on gaining employment. Our findings indicate the concealment of past convictions through New Zealand's clean slate scheme might happen too late to make a huge difference. But there are changes that can be made to improve work outcomes for people who have completed their sentences. This could include following the example of countries such as Finland, where access to criminal histories is much more restricted. In Finland, the background check has to be directly relevant to the job requirements. For example, the law allows checks for someone applying to work in the financial sector who was convicted of fraud. There would also be benefits from looking at the eligibility criteria for New Zealand's clean slate scheme. Currently, it only applies to people who committed a minor offence. But policymakers should consider whether it makes sense to expand the policy to people who committed more serious crimes but managed to turn their life around. Making this change would allow people to reap the benefits of working without stigma. All that said, the government's current 'tough on crime' stance makes change unlikely, with a focus on the cost of crime rather than what happens after punishment has been completed. Disclosure statement Kabir Dasgupta is affiliated with the Federal Reserve Board. The opinions expressed in this article does not reflect the views of the the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Reserve System. Alexander Plum does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
