Dear Ministry of Social Development,

Context: WINZ recommends clients to downsize / move house to reduce costs, but don't tell you or warn you that your benefit will be reduced as a result until AFTER the move occurs prompting a whole range of further secondary problems.

What policy authorises reducing Jobseeker Support dollar-for-dollar when rent decreases?

How does MSD justify this policy not disincentivising cost-saving behaviour by clients?

Has MSD assessed whether this policy penalises responsible financial decisions?

Does MSD recognise one-off relocation costs (movers, bond, rent overlap) when reassessing entitlement? (In the event of not taking up a WINZ loan and using own money or friends / family)

Does it matter whether moving costs are paid by the client or on their behalf?

Are clients explicitly warned that reducing rent may result in an equivalent benefit reduction?

What guidance are case managers given to explain this outcome before a client moves?

How often are Reviews of Decision upheld where accommodation costs decrease?

How many Jobseeker Support recipients had benefits reduced in the last year due to lower rent after a move / downsize? Of those, how many later received Temporary Additional Support or grants?

Has MSD reviewed complaints or BRC outcomes related to this issue?

How does MSD ensure this policy aligns with the Social Security Act’s hardship and wellbeing principles?

What safeguards exist to ensure clients are not worse off overall after accommodation changes?

How does MSD assess the impact of accommodation-related benefit reductions on a client’s ability to afford essential prescription medication?

What safeguards exist to ensure benefit reassessments do not result in clients being unable to access prescribed treatment?

Are case managers required to consider medical and pharmaceutical costs when accommodation costs decrease?

Under what policy are clients expected to absorb both one-off moving costs and ongoing medical costs after a benefit reduction?

Has MSD assessed whether accommodation-based reductions disproportionately affect clients with high, unavoidable health expenses?

Can MSD confirm whether the system flags situations where a reduction may lead to medical hardship?

How does MSD monitor whether reductions in Jobseeker Support after accommodation changes affect clients’ long-term financial stability?

Are there any internal reviews or audits of how often clients become worse off after moving to cheaper accommodation?

What training do case managers receive to balance cost savings against overall client wellbeing?

Are there any metrics tracking whether reductions lead to clients skipping essentials (food, medication, utilities)?

How does MSD handle situations where clients incur unavoidable costs to comply with housing or employment obligations?

Has MSD conducted any public or internal consultation on whether current rules for accommodation-related reductions are fair or effective?

How much does MSD spend on case manager and administrative hourly rates handling Reviews of Decision versus the financial impact of honouring the dispute?

Has MSD conducted a cost-benefit analysis comparing the resources spent disputing small benefit adjustments against resolving them in favour of the client?

How much staff time (average hours) is spent per Review of Decision when accommodation-related reductions are disputed?

Does MSD track whether quick resolution of disputes would reduce costs compared to prolonged internal handling?

Are there any policies or targets aimed at minimizing administrative overhead while ensuring clients are not left worse off?

Yours faithfully,

James Welsh