Collins’ Bennett problem

22 comments on “Collins’ Bennett problem ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Chris 1

   16 August 2012 at 1:17 pm

   Couple of things – first Paula Bennett and Judith Collins are different people, just because something doesn’t hurt Paula Bennett’s reputation doesn’t automatically mean being accused of that thing isn’t hurtful to Judith Collins’ reputation.

   Secondly how does honest opinion apply in this situation?
2. DJ 2

   16 August 2012 at 1:17 pm

   Not too sure how you got from “She obviously doesn’t see doing it as hurting her reputation.”

   to “So, if Bennett’s case proves that it doesn’t hurt the reputation ..”

   Pretty loose conclusion to draw.
   • Hayden 2.1

     16 August 2012 at 3:24 pm

     It could be inferred from Bennett’s and English’s statements yesterday that it’s Government policy to release private information about people who publicly criticise the Government, therefore it’s difficult to successfully argue that being accused of executing that policy is defamatory. Just a possibility…

     It’s interesting to note the difference in the wider public’s reactions to each of the leaks: a number of people thought they had the right to know about beneficiaries’ income, but I don’t remember anyone arguing the same about Bronwyn Pullar, also a beneficiary, albeit of a different kind.
     • Chris 2.1.1

       16 August 2012 at 4:07 pm

       Yeah I found that a bit strange as well – the only explanation I can come up with is the general public is not on the benefit so don’t mind people’s benefit information being leaked. Whereas everyone is on ACC and don’t want their own details leaked.
3. Dr Terry 3

   16 August 2012 at 1:23 pm

   It will not “hurt”her reputation so much as “Confirm”her reputation (presuming that she has any “reputation” to speak of!)
   • Murray Olsen 3.1

     16 August 2012 at 4:06 pm

     Exactly. How can she prove that her reputation of being heartless, ruthless and spiteful was damaged by anything that Mallard (puke) or Little could do? A politician suing for damaged reputation is a total oxymoron.
4. Treetop 4

   16 August 2012 at 2:03 pm

   One of these ministers is a bully, the other one cannot see that the core of the problem is the sick culture at ACC and that her personal diversion is a hindrance to cleaning up a toxic government department.
5. Fortran 5

   16 August 2012 at 2:25 pm

   Both Ministers are considered bullys.
   But, I would not like to get into a shit fight with either of them.
6. Anne 6

   16 August 2012 at 2:45 pm

   Bennett hasn’t done too well thus far at Question time. The speaker described her behaviour in the House as like that of a three year old, which caused her to laugh out loud as though he was saying it as a joke. Trouble was he responded by telling her it wasn’t a joke.
   • Carol 6.1

     16 August 2012 at 2:55 pm

     Yes, Anne. Methinks the Minister was a little rattled – also jumping up to answer a question before the Speaker had given her the nod to answer it.
     • mike 6.1.1

       16 August 2012 at 3:34 pm

       Where can I witness this feast for the senses?
       • Carol 6.1.1.1

         16 August 2012 at 4:00 pm

         Don’t know about a video of it (question time will be repeated on the Parliament channel on freeview 6pm tonight, fr those that get it).

         But here’s a transcript:

         http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QOA/a/6/b/50HansQ_20120816_00000004-4-Poverty-Reduction-Minister-s-Statements.htm

         Mr SPEAKER: Order! …
         —[Interruption] Order! I say to the Minister do not interject. I have had enough of this today and there will not—the Minister is showing no more discipline, or less discipline, than a 3-year-old child. It will cease. I am serious.

         Jacinda Ardern: Does she agree that today 20 percent of New Zealand children live in poverty?

         Mr SPEAKER: The Hon—[Interruption] Order! I have not even called the Minister. Can I encourage the Minister to settle down.
       • Anne 6.1.1.2

         16 August 2012 at 4:08 pm

         Google NZ Parliament
         Click on to ‘Watch Parliament.’
         Click on to ‘high’ or ‘low’ resolution whichever is preferable.

         Question Time (2pm – approx.3:15pm each sitting day) is replayed between 6pm and 7:30pm for those who can’t watch or miss the afternoon session.

         oops: Carol has already answered. Still some idea what to do in future…
         • mike 6.1.1.2.1

           16 August 2012 at 4:27 pm

           Much thanks Carol and Anne.

           Of course I’m guessing no one will ask her what I really wish they would:

           “Would the Minister for Demonizing Beneficiaries please explain how it is that she thinks she can get away with giving the Human Rights Commission her trademark hair flick?”

           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdMlXDrbkcs

           Although I guess I already know the answer, she knows her boss won’t do a thing about it ‘cept smile and wave.
       • deuto 6.1.1.3

         16 August 2012 at 4:24 pm

         The Parliament video archives on In the House are now really up to date and the videos of Question Time today are already available – here is a link. Click on it and then choose the question(s) you want to view eg Question 4 is the one where Bennett was told she was acting like a three year old at about 4.58 mins in but it is worth watching the whole video as it was ‘lively’. Her performance was slightly more restrained on question 11. Questions 2,5 and 7 are also worth watching.

         http://inthehouse.co.nz/video_archive
         • Carol 6.1.1.3.1

           16 August 2012 at 4:32 pm

           I thought questions 10 & 11 were important, with Sue Moroney & Jan Logie highlighting NAct’s abysmal record on issues impacting strongly on a lot of women.
           • deuto 6.1.1.3.1.1

             16 August 2012 at 4:47 pm

             I agree, Carol. Have a lot of time for Sue M and also increasingly Jan. In fact, there are more and more good (Opposition) women in the House, many of whom are first timers such as Genter. Have also seen NZF’s Asenati Lole-Taylor in action several times recently – no holding back there!
   • Carol 6.2

     16 August 2012 at 5:10 pm

     And a Minister on the back foot is getting a bit of cut-through into the MSM:

     http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10827418

     Social Development Minister Paula Bennett said it was not a priority to measure New Zealand’s poverty line.
     …
     Labour spokeswoman from children Jacinda Ardern said child poverty would not be resolved if the Government would not acknowledge the scale of the problem.

     “Given Ms Bennett’s frivolous treatment of what is a hugely serious issue, the public have every right to question her commitment to it.”

     “The message is clear. Either Paula Bennett doesn’t want to admit to the scale of the problem, or she is afraid of exposing her government’s lack of progress in fixing it.”

     Meanwhile, Brent Edwards on RNZ has just delivered a report on Bennett’s telling off by the Speaker today.

     http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/113427/bennett%27s-behaviour-worse-than-3-year-old-speaker

     Parliament’s Speaker Lockwood Smith has given the social development minister a severe telling off as she tried to answer questions on poverty on Thursday afternoon.
     • mike 6.2.1

       16 August 2012 at 6:29 pm

       “”There is no actual poverty line,” she said.”

       (Line? What line? I can’t see any line? Can you see a line?)

       “”Children move in and out of poverty on a daily basis,” said Ms Bennett”

       (If only these damn kids would make up their minds, then yeah sure, I’d do some stats on them.)

       Two very unflattering photos on that Herald article too. Good job.
7. tracey 7

   16 August 2012 at 5:03 pm

   Its a joke… All those people who derided the last pm for thinking she knew best seem hypocritically quiet right now.
8. just saying 8

   16 August 2012 at 7:34 pm

   I’ve searched the usual places including Scoop which publishes press releases from all the parties unaltered, and I can find no press release from Labour condemning Bennet’s illegal actions in relation to Fuller. I think it’s fair to assume that because a beneficary was injured (and all other beneficaries threatened with the same if they publicly criticise the government) the Labour Party has deemed that she is therefore officially sub-human, as are all beneficaries, and they will continue to refuse to oppose even illegal actions from the government harming such persons.

   I can’t even summon up contempt and anger right at the moment. I just feeling like crying at where we’ve come to, and what it means for our collective future.
   • Carol 8.1

     16 August 2012 at 7:46 pm

     Yep. Metiria Turei has put out a statement for the Green Party:

     http://www.greens.org.nz/press-releases/prime-minister-must-tell-bennett-follow-privacy-law

     http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1208/S00206/prime-minister-must-tell-bennett-to-follow-privacy-law.htm

     Nothing on Labour’s website. They seem more concerned with Hekia Parata’s bullying. I guess the opposition can take their pick from NAct’s bullying and undemocratic practices.

     But there should have been a statement on this, sooner rather than.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS