KEY POINTS:
It was Hillary Clinton, as First Lady of the United States, who popularised the African proverb "It takes a village to raise a child". Her 1996 book had a simple message: the way children develop is inextricably entwined with the way society supports families and individuals. It can't
be left to families alone, or to governments. It was simple, obvious probably, but inevitably political. In the United States, the theory could be seen as ideological - a tendency to encourage nanny state into the private lives of households, or as a necessary call for communities and agencies to provide support to save children from neglect and failure.
There are echoes now of that debate in New Zealand. National leader John Key is, in his own way, trying to get the "village" to start helping some children in socioeconomic groupings at most risk. Again, his is a simple enough call, seeking business and community help in addressing one tangible area of need - hunger among school children. Yet it has proven highly political. This time it is the man from the right, rather than the First Lady from the left, being criticised with some of the same arguments reversed.
Mr Key stands accused of making cynical use of a vulnerable underclass to score points against that group's most obvious political protector, the Labour Party. He is painted as a hypocrite because he seeks community and business help to address a degree of poverty that his own party's policies of lower government spending, less welfare and greater individual responsibility could accentuate.
From his political right comes the admonition to place the blame on the individuals responsible, the parents, rather than society. Labour, for its part, seeks to make Mr Key's interest into a hollow stunt. The Prime Minister and Education Minister argue with researchers and the news media over the number of school children who might be attending schools hungry.
But the posturing, opportunism and spin from all sides cannot deny that there is a real problem with undernourished children, leading to poor learning and behaviour and whatever lies beyond on that cycle. Yesterday, the Herald revealed that the Red Cross and the Countdown supermarket chain would soon offer food for all 200 of the lowest-ranking primary schools.
The Red Cross? In peacetime and in disaster-free New Zealand? It is a plan which pre-dated Mr Key's interest. His answers appear to be temporary one-offs, and may well be fraught with practical difficulties for which an Opposition leader need not be held accountable. Some suggestions he has made have not been thought through.
Perhaps, though, that is because he has stimulated unexpected interest in an issue needing multiple answers that only the Village model can adequately address.
Under that, the state agencies in welfare and education would be thoroughly involved in broad policy responses, and community groups, businesses, charities, churches, neighbours and individuals who can complement that work would be encouraged and inspired to act rather than turn away.
If the Government can now embrace Mr Key's political initiative, rather than dismiss it, a complex problem shared could go some way towards becoming a problem solved.
