LINDSAY MITCHELL: Who's to blame for the sorry state of some primary school entrants?

"Didn't know I was pregnant till about six months gone. So yeah, I've been drinking and smoking P. Don't know who the father is. But that doesn't matter any more. I'll get more benefit money when the baby comes.  Plus I'll get into a state house quick 'cause I've got a kid. So then I'll have my own place and do whatever I like all day."

OK. I concocted that brief monologue but having worked with a number of young mothers (or in one instance, a young father left with full care of his and another man's child) I can assure you it isn't a figment of my imagination.

Condoning a system that encourages this exact thought pattern and behaviour, five years later, society suddenly expects this child to turn up to school able to write their own name, showing empathy, self-control and not wearing pull-ups. 

A report on NewstalkZB about the increasing deficit in school readiness appears to lay blame on a lack of early childhood education.  Advocates for more ECE funding are given the sole voice.

But blaming  a lack of ECE is putting the cart before the horse.

Surely, engaged parenting is crucial even if it is rarely mentioned by the 'experts'.

As usual, it is difficult to find objective, unbiased and comprehensible NZ research that supports a more conservative view. So I have excerpted a large scale study into school readiness and financial disadvantage published by the Australian government in October 2009:

"... it is important to recognise that many of the risk factors for low school readiness are more common in financially disadvantaged families than they are in other families (see Appendix Table A1). In particular, compared to non-financially disadvantaged families, within financially disadvantaged families the father was more often absent or not employed; mothers were more often not employed, more likely to have incomplete secondary education and more likely to be relatively young; parents were more likely to exhibit low levels of parental warmth and consistency, and to read to their child less often; and children had fewer books and watched more television. Further, 41% of children in financially disadvantaged families lived in the lowest neighbourhood SES quintile."

Yes, ECE can mitigate the deficits but that's after the fact. More ECE also requires the government (or you) to fund a possible solution having first funded the development of the problem.

Whether its National or Labour, the government is endlessly chasing its tail.

I repeat the following fact ad nauseam: each and every year, one in five NZ children is born onto a benefit and will stay there for most of its formative young life.

No, the benefit itself isn't causal. It's the lifestyle the benefit enables that does the damage.

When will a future government recognise and act on this reality?

Lindsay Mitchell blogs here