Daily review 03/05/2021

6 comments on “Daily review 03/05/2021 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Muttonbird 1

   3 May 2021 at 5:49 pm

   Looks like the office of Chris Bishop has been busy:

   The government never released the full report publicly but an unredacted version was leaked to the National Party which published it at the weekend.

   I reckon this report was leaked to order by the National Party. They will have identified it as a weapon with which to stoke division. A weapon with which to whip up racial prejudice among their base.

   They simply had the get their hands on it in order to relive the heady days of Orewa, 2004. Friendly actors within the public service duly complied.

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/441697/he-puapua-report-collins-called-divisive-meant-to-create-unity-author-says

   Meanwhile:

   People should not be fearful of Māori authority over Māori things.

   – He Puapua contributing author, Claire Charters

   Seems reasonable to me.
   • I Feel Love 1.1

     3 May 2021 at 7:23 pm

     Very reasonable to me too Muttonbird.
2. Sabine 2

   3 May 2021 at 6:27 pm

   they just can't do the right thing. They just really can't. When all you are is ideology and nothing much else.

   http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/05/government-of-kindness.html

   But despite overwhelming evidence free lunches work to keep students in school and learning, the Government won't commit to making it universal.

   Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told The AM Show although she, in principle, supports universal free school lunches, it's "a matter of prioritisation".

   "I don't have a problem with unlimited lunches. I think that would be great… But I have to prioritise, and it is quite costly to roll out and I have to ask the question 'is that the next step for us?'"

   The Government hasn't costed what it would take to provide free lunches across Aotearoa, but Ardern says the current program costs "hundreds of millions".

   from here https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2021/05/government-won-t-commit-to-making-free-lunches-universal-despite-clear-evidence-it-works-to-keep-kids-in-school.html

   Well never mind, the poor will get an extra 57 NZD over the next 2.5 years and surely that will pay for a sandwich in 2023 just in time for election.

   Dear Leader, if your “support in principle” is not getting funding your principles ain't worth fudge. Also hungry kids is NZ as, let them grow up hard, hungry and cold.
   • Spa 2.1

     3 May 2021 at 9:25 pm

     Hundreds of millions sounds like a lot? Some rough numbers:

     – 200 school days per year

     – $5 per lunch

     – $1000 per student per year

     – $100m would buy lunches for 100,000 students

     Are there hundreds of thousands of school kids getting a $5 lunch everyday?

     Or perhaps it's hundreds of millions over several years.

     Or perhaps I can't add.
3. greywarshark 3

   3 May 2021 at 6:28 pm

   In mid-April, a group of four rūnaka called Murihiku Regeneration met with the Environment Ministry, regional council and Department of Conservation.

   They were aiming to ensure the contaminated smelter gets cleaned up.

   It was understood the inaugural meeting with Māori and officials did not get any new data.

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/441682/rio-tinto-executive-meets-southland-iwi-over-tiwai-point-aluminium-smelter-closure
4. Sabine 4

   3 May 2021 at 9:46 pm

   just what ever, it really just does not matter ey?

   Kinder, and gentler and ……..yeah, right, Tui.

   https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/government-spends-55-million-on-it-to-charge-for-emergency-motel-stays/ON7CPLAL6QRHOX6KHHYW5J7ZK4/

   he Government is being criticised for spending $5.5 million on IT changes so it could charge people living in motels for their emergency accommodation.

   Since October, people living in emergency accommodation have had to pay 25 per cent of their income towards the cost of motels, bringing them in line with other social housing costs.

   Prior to that their stay was covered by the Ministry for Social Development unless they failed to meet their obligations in searching for new accommodation.

   The charge was outlined in a briefing to housing ministers in September 2019, and described a need to introduce equity across the housing system.

   "It also aims to incentivise clients to consider emergency housing as an option of last resort, as it was intended."

   ocial Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni said the spend was necessary to change the system.

   "We didn't make this change or create this part-payment to be punitive towards those that are in emergency accommodation … it's about fairness and it's about consistency."

   She said community groups were the ones who first suggested the payment – but Peter Sykes of Māngere East Family Services said the charge did not make sense.

   "You've got the poorest of the poor being charged – and it's not going to create more housing, it's not going to create solutions, it's not going to address the problems."

   He said the 25 per cent payment needed to be scrapped as it wasn't actually about helping struggling families, but was instead a political move.

   [The following bit in bold was missing from the quoted text for some (?) reason. It could easily mislead the reader to think that “she” refers to Sepuloni when in fact it refers to Davidson]

   …

   Associate Housing Minister Marama Davidson last week described the conditions at some motels as “inhumane”.

   She wouldn't be interviewed for this story but her colleague, Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March, said their party policy was that the charge should be wiped.

   "People should not be put in a position where they're being made to pay for a housing crisis that they did not cause.

   "Additionally, emergency housing is not actually housing, it's probably more akin to shelter since people don't have a tenancy agreement, they have no rights and they have a lot of obligations each week to meet in order to roll out more emergency housing for one week at a time."

   Can you all feel the kindness and fairness and gentlenessness of the government towards its most vulnerable citizens? Forcing someone who is homeless to spend 25% of a starvation benefit on emergency housing is not fair.

   And to spend 5.5 million on IT to make sure it claws it all back. This government.

   [comment edited]

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS