It is most unjust but then I am just bitter and twisted.
However daughter has recovered (sort of) got her degree and is off on her OE
Mean while another meal of instant noodles awaits

NOTE :On reflection I should have take a support person advocate with me to WINZ
I recommend people needing there services do the same

I have a dilemma.

For I am told that a person losing their job gets no dole if their partner has a minimum wage job. They are supposed to live on $25,000 (before tax) for two people. This is little more than the dole which would be about $19,000 for two people over 25. They might get an accomodation supplement if they were renting or paying a mortgage – but this would not cover some of the initial cost and then only a proportion of the rest and only up to a maximum claim limit.

Why is the income of Bill English’s partner not considered?

Why is it that Mrs English cannot provide for the housing needs of herself and her partner and their children on her own doctors salary. Do doctors not earn enough to do so? She is a GP in Wellington is she not? Her family live with her do they not?

If not living with his wife, all Bill needs is a one flat for himself, or to share a flat with another Cabinet Minister or MP or secretary who is prepared to do the household chores (who needs a Finance Minister eating corn beef and peas and washing their own socks in a wash basin). Even in Wellington that does not cost $1000 a week (there are hotels who would charge less than that for regular guests).

If living with his wife, he needs no allowance.

Frankly that a person on near $200,000 income with a working professional partner living locally needs an out of town allowance at all is a scandal, yet it became worse when they claimed a greater amount when their salary increased to well over $200,000. That reflects badly on all those in this system who put their hand out for their entitlement and who thus consented to its continuance.

It should be income tested AND partner tested like any other government handout. There need to be some limits on the housing ambition of claimaints – only compensating for a proportion of their housing costs as for the accomodation supplement.

This system (especially when seen in comparison with what government provides to others in greater need) does not do justice, it is not fair and it is not equitable.

I would also not put it past this govt to make a retrospective ruling to try and shift the point of attack to previous govts to cover their arses.

Its pathetic that there’s an allowance for this that they take willingly while an allowance for less fortunate (with better results for the people of NZ) is scraped. And then the less fortunate are persecuted by the fucking hypocrites

I defined it real simple, just for you. In “felix isn’t impressed” terms.

I’ve got better things to do than this. Like watch a doco about Kinski.

Completely agree. I’m glad the will of the Green party has finally come to fruition.

Not.

You are incapable of admitting when you are wrong.

So far what you’ve said on the topic (heh) can be summed up as:

Labour are not as transparent as the Nats, the Greens are just as bad as the Nats if not worse, and PLEASE DON”T FORGET ABOUT WINSTON!! Oh and mumble mumble it’s not a good look for Bill but it’s probably all legal so no big deal.

I think that about covers your contribution, burt. Anything you’d like to add?