Didn’t Bennett say something in Parliament about her office having to regularly field enquiries from MPs about the WINZ entitlements of individual constituents?

Why on earth should those enquiries go to the Minister’s office? Isn’t that the sort of thing that electorate secretaries and local WINZ offices are for?

It is well established in criminal law that the perpetrator of violence or abuse against a child can’t be identified if it would identify the identity of the child.

Just two examples from the sad litany of child abuse in New Zealand: at one end of the continuum Kahui, and Jimmy Mason at the other. Would you like more examples?

Timothy may have meant that the names of children who survive sexual abuse and/or other violence carried out by someone who would by association identify the victim then, yes. Otherwise, its another example of Timothy bullshit.

It is well established in criminal law that the perpetrator of violence or abuse against a child can’t be identified if it would identify the identity of the child.

Just one exampleof the sad litany of child abuse in New Zealand: Kahui. Timothy may have meant that the names of children who survive sexual abuse and/or violence carried out by someone who would by association identify the victim then, yes. Otherwise, its another example of Timothy bullshit.

I think though there are three issues. Should there be a defence if a person goes public with only half their details, to allow the Minister to release the other half of the details to put the case in perspective? I think so, and the advice from the Privacy Commission is they have that defence. I don’t know if it applies in this case.

Secondly, is it ethical for a political party to put up individual cases (people often in quite difficult circumstances) to put up only half the relevant information and then expose those individuals to humiliation when the media finds out the full facts? This isn’t the first time that the Labour Party has done this. Mr Goff seems to be fashioning his leadership style around hamming up a case using only half a story, and then leaving the poor sod to face the music when the media finds out the rest of the facts.

Thirdly (and it isn’t the you did it too defence), but I get annoyed with Labour saying that they didn’t do it. It’s either acceptable conduct for a Minister or it’s not, as you say. Labour shouldn’t play for outrage game over it when according to half of the press gallery it was common practice for Labour to shop this around. That is not an excuse for the conduct but it does mitigate against Labour’s outrage over it.

That is actually quite disconcerting. Are we to believe that there is access to individual welfare case files in the ministers office? That sounds like BS to me and I suspect somebody is telling porkies.

However if the minister has direct access available to individual case files the question “WHY?” needs to be asked.

Oh, cheers for the Herald link.

It’s worrying to think that a Minister would have free access to personal details at all, whether they were to make them public or not.

Bennett was also confronted in Parliament by questions about where the information had come from. It appears from her answers to Annette King that Bennett has a computer in her office from which her welfare officials can access beneficiary files.

That is how she got the information – without going through the chief executive of the ministry of social development, Peter Hughes.

Labour is suggesting that Hughes, one of the public service’s leading CE’s, is furious about it. That may or may not be true but at the every least he should have been consulted about such a sensitive matter.

Herald

Not sure if this makes it any better or not. At least the Ministry may not have been directly involved.

What I’m asking is; Can the minister just ask somebody in MSD/WINZ/Social Welfare to give her the details for individuals?

This in itself sounds wrong ?

However as much as I like knowing how much these welfare cases who are lovers of state dependency really take off productive people each week – I don’t think Bennett was right to release the details.