Daily Review 07/02/2018

Written By: - Date published: 5:29 pm, February 7th, 2018 - 35 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

35 comments on “Daily Review 07/02/2018”

  1. Muttonbird 1

    The bad old days; when William had hair, and Key was still here.

    • veutoviper 1.1

      LOL!

      Coincidence or deliberate choice for tonight? Unless I am mistaken tonight is the BBQ at Simon Bridges in Tauranga before National hold their Caucus retreat in Tauranga over the next two days.

      Weather forecast is for good weather tonight and tomorrow, but stormy on Friday with some heavy downpours of tears (rain) …

  2. Rosemary McDonald 3

    Today is a special day.

    The Appeal Court decision of Camberlain v the Minister of Health was released with a finding for Chamberlain.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/GE1802/S00022/judgment-chamberlain-v-minister-of-health.htm

    Okay, I do bang on about the many, many failings of the Ministry of Health and I might have conveyed the impression that in my opinion MOH Disability Support Services deliberately obstruct disabled people’s access to funded disability supports…like they get a kick out of making folk suffer…

    Well, that’s NOT what the Judge said…


    Postscript

    [90] We make two additional points. First, we note that this is the third occasion on which a dispute between the Ministry of Health and parents who care for disabled adult children has reached this Court. We hope that in the future parties to disputes over the nature and extent of funding eligibility are able to settle their differences without litigation.

    Second, we have referred to our unease, which is shared by Palmer J, about the complexity of the statutory instruments governing funding eligibility for disability support services. They verge on the impenetrable, especially for a lay person, and have not been revised or updated to take into account the significant change brought about by pt 4A. We hope that the Ministry is able to find an effective means of streamlining the regime, thereby rendering it accessible for the people who need it most and those who care for them.”

    (Paragraph inserted by me.)

    “They verge on the impenetrable…” 🙂 🙂

    This will not be the end, however. The Misery are very poor and ungracious losers and will probably appeal, or do a re-assessment and allocate 27 hours per week. Diane will request a review and it will be knocked back to 22 hours per week. I am hypothesizing…but this has actually happened in another family carers case.

    I’m not seeing any indication that this Government will be any more inclined towards instructing the Misery of Health to treat eligible disabled New Zealanders not only with respect, but according to the Law and the Human Rights Act.

    But, for now we’ll take another win.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 3.1

      Yay!

      This ruling needs to go straight to Cabinet. If David Clark doesn’t have legislative changes in the pipeline that warrants a “please explain”.

      …the statutory instruments governing funding eligibility for disability support services … verge on the impenetrable, especially for a lay person…

      If Cabinet fails, I wonder how a legal challenge to that failure on human rights grounds might fare.

      Disability support is something almost 100% of us will use at one time or another. I wish more currently able-bodied people realised that.

      • Rosemary McDonald 3.1.1

        “If Cabinet fails, I wonder how a legal challenge to that failure on human rights grounds might fare.”

        Hmmm…you may or may not be up on the play with this….https://publicaddress.net/access/the-family-carers-case-here-we-go-again/

        (my attempt to nutshell the sad saga so far, going back to 1999.)

        The Atkinson case, and the government’s response to losing through the HRRT and the courts, is cited by Palmer and Butler as why we need a constitution.

        David Clark has been written to by other plaintiffs in our case that is due to go to Court in February 2019. These letters have been ignored.

        We are not many in this latest case, and if pigs fly and miracles happen and the MOH is ordered to pay full compensation for unpaid care provided, the total amount is about $6 million, in total. (This is unlikely as Crown Law and the Misery are fighting tooth and nail and will appeal if they lose. It’s just what they do.)

        BUT…some of us, and this includes my partner and I, would prefer to go to Court so there is further light shed into the dark and murky corners of MOH Disability Support Services. And, the OIA is a wonderful thing, To actually have hard core evidence from documents generated within their system that points directly to their mindboggling incompetence. Honestly…you have NO idea. (Shakes head with almost pity.)

        At the very, very most (and Genter, as Assoc Minister of Health (disability) has responded to letters,,,and good on her 🙂 ) what will happen is the Minister will consult with the Ministry, and unless there has been a 100% purge of ALL and EVERY (sorry to shout but I am actually shouting) MOH staffer that has ever worked there it will be SSDD.

        They really have serious and ingrained negative attitudes towards people with disabilities, especially those at the more high and complex end of support needs.

        But this, today, is a win. PS. Golriz Ghahraman was the lawyer for Chamberlain in the original failed Judicial Review for this case…some credit to her that it won on Appeal.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 3.1.1.1

          Yeah I did wonder if I was a bit late to that party. It looks like the arguments are sound though, and the courts are definitely getting fed up with hearing them, if Judge Harrison’s words are anything to go by.

          Good to hear about Genter, thanks.

          • Rosemary McDonald 3.1.1.1.1

            “Judge Harrison’s words are anything to go by…”

            Must be the evening for nostalgia. The Good Judge was one of the ones on the Appeal Court Bench in the 2012 hearing for Atkinson.

            https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/pdf/jdo/97/alfresco/service/api/node/content/workspace/SpacesStore/c7884406-23c4-4fd5-ab70-0f1175760d63/c7884406-23c4-4fd5-ab70-0f1175760d63.pdf

            My partner seems to recall it was he who leaned forward from the Bench and inquired (with no small hint of frustration) if the Ministry actually had any grounds for the Appeal. Or was it him who said…’after ten years shouldn’t you be coming up with solutions to this issue rather than more questions?’..or words to that effect.
            I get confused…so many Court hearings over such a long time.

            • weka 3.1.1.1.1.1

              Thanks for all this.

              I’m putting up a post of the Court of Appeal’s press release for the morning, hope you can both comment there as well.

            • McFlock 3.1.1.1.1.2

              Thanks.

              This situation is disgraceful, and has lasted through many governments.

              It seems to be a classic situation where the longer it goes on, the more damage occurs, and the more expensive it becomes to do the right thing compared to current practise. And the more incentive there is to cover it up with exhaustive legal challenges, no matter how futile. Nobody – manager or politician – wants to be the one left with the hot potato.

              I look forward to Weka’s post

              • Rosemary McDonald

                “…and the more expensive it becomes to do the right thing ”

                Actually, no.

                I’d love to say “Actually, not necessarily”, but I’d be wrong.

                There has been a shit tonne of (deliberate?) misinformation disseminated by some parties as to the cost of ‘paying family carers’, with attending predictions of a flood of claimants “coming out of the woodwork” demanding to be paid for past, current and future care.

                Hence the iniquitous section 70 E of the PHDAct (2).

                Totally unnecessary, and as you rightly point out, it is disgraceful and the damage done is most likely permanent.

    • AsleepWhileWalking 3.2

      The impenetrable nature of funding is by design.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 3.3

      PS: “The pay equity working group did good work but its existence was forced upon the Government by a decision in the Supreme Court.” Pam Nuttall.

      “Nuttall’s observations are not that far off the mark from comments made by Workplace relations Minister Iain Lees-Galloway after the announcement of the hobbit-law working group at the end of last month… ”

      Teuila Fuatai at Newsroom.

      Maybe the timing is right, although I know you don’t so much trust the NZLP as aim rhetorical arrows at them.

    • Cinny 3.4

      That’s fantastic news, it is a special day.

      Really appreciate this post and your story/situation. Thanks Rosemary, much respect to all fighting the same battle. I remember hearing Dianes story along with others on The Nation awhile back, was a wtf moment.

      There’s a chance for real change, there must be real change with this coalition.

      The number 3 is relevant, noted it with interest in the postscript, it’s a good thing.

    • Antoine 3.5

      Yay

  3. AsleepWhileWalking 4

    Delaware might be the first State going full Frankenstein.

    https://needtoknow.news/2018/02/delaware-proposes-allowing-children-choose-race-gender-including-hormone-drugs-without-parents-knowledge/

    “Drafted by Delaware Gov. John Carney, the anti-discrimination policy states that children from K-12 can choose their own name, identify with whatever race or gender they feel most comfortable with, and even access hormone blockers necessary to transition without the consent of their parents. Regulation 225 “Prohibition Of Discrimination” also indicates that students will be able to join any sports team they choose and can use bathrooms and showers according their chosen identity.”

  4. weka 5

    re a question in OM today about how the GP co-leadership election works if there is only one nomination, I asked on twitter and was told the following.

    All elected positions go through a vote even if there is only one candidate.

    The voting options are for the Candidate or Reopen Nominations.

    The Candidate has to get at least 75% of the vote. If they don’t, then they can’t be co-leader from that election (and presumably another round of nominations must happen).

    That’s all hypothetical for this election at this stage, nominations close on Friday.

    Mon Feb 12 – Full list of nominations announced, however candidates can individually announce their candidacy any time after nominations have opened and they’ve filed their paperwork

    Voting is done by delegates from the branches.

    https://www.greens.org.nz/news/press-release/timeline-announced-green-party-female-co-leadership-election

    • McFlock 5.1

      that’s a good way of doing it. Still means that if the single candidate is too divisive, the position remains vacant until someone better comes along

    • veutoviper 5.2

      Thanks for this weka (and your other response on OM). Also a belated thanks for your clarification some days ago re the Simeon Brown Members Bill on synthetic cannabis drawn last week. I was so PO’ed re the results of the vote on Chloe Swarbrick’s Members Bill the night before, I did not check Brown’s proposed Bill properly.

      My original question re the Green Party Co-Leader election process popped into my mind because I was in a position years ago as (elected/unpaid) Chair of a Charity where we had only one nomination for a position who was totally unsuitable for the position and we had to do some fancy footwork to get us out of the situation because of lack of such provisions in our rules. I don’t recommend being in such a situation!

      I was in no way suggesting that the one nomination to date for the Green Co-Leader position is unsuitable (far from it!). Just one of those ‘deja vu’ moments.

      The procedures in the Greens rules are excellent, in my opinion.

  5. Macro 6

    The Repugnants must be getting worried….

    Democrats flipped a Missouri state House seat Tuesday, marking the 35th seat that has changed from red to blue since Donald Trump become president.

    Mike Revis, 27, defeated his Republican opponent in a special election Tuesday by 3 percentage points.

    The 97th District in Jefferson County went for Trump in the presidential election by 28 points.

    In other words, the district has swung 31 percentage points toward Democrats since Trump won last year.

    Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) called the results a “wake-up call” for his party, and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Republicans certainly needed to “pay attention” to the results.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/missouri-special-election_us_5a7a6df2e4b0d0ef3c0a8594?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
    The question is…
    “With their own arses on the line.. how long will they look the other way in protecting the Chump?”

    • adam 6.1

      This is becasue republican policy is crap. And republican election promises are never followed up – I’m even picking a flip on the TPPA by the end of the month.

    • Andre 6.2

      Well, if Pennsylvania Repugs are anything to go by, they’ll have a go at the judiciary next to cling to power.

      https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pennsylvania-supreme-court-impeachment_us_5a79cdb8e4b00f94fe95ade3?section=us_politics

      But the bottom line for the vast majority of Repug pollies is still that their job security is at greater risk from being primaried by angry Trumpkins than from losing to a Dem. So nothing will get them to move against the Spraytan Stalin.

      • Macro 6.2.1

        Democratic energy is high — and it’s being reflected in fundraising
        There have been plenty of bad signs for Republicans throughout 2017 and the first part of 2018. The first cropped up earlier this year, when the first numbers came out showing the sheer number of Democratic candidates jumping into House races.

        Numbers released by the Campaign Finance Institute this fall showed 391 Democratic House candidates had raised at least $5,000. Of that number, 210 Democrats had raised at least $50,000, and 145 had raised at least $100,000.

        ……… Chart which shows massive increase in Democrat candidates agains Repugnants

        These numbers are off the charts, compared to past midterms. Since 2003, there has never been this many challengers before the midterm elections. The highest number before that was 78 Republican challengers in 2009, the year before the Republican wave during the 2010 midterms, in which the GOP picked up six Senate seats and 64 seats in the House.

        “From the Democratic side, there’s nothing that looked like these numbers, including the 2010 wave,” Michael Malbin, the executive director of the Campaign Finance Institute, said when Vox talked to him last year.

        The number of candidates shows that Democrats are energized, but Malbin also cautioned that it wasn’t enough to predict a blue wave sweeping the House in 2018. Instead, it showed that key ingredients for a wave are in place; not only is there intense energy around Democratic candidates, they are also organized, entering races and fundraising early.

        Furthermore, Democrats are benefiting more from grassroots enthusiasm and fundraising. Small-dollar donors (defined as people who give $200 or less) gave the DCCC $41.6 million in 2017. The National Republican Congressional Committee, on the other hand, got $9.8 million from small-dollar donors.

        https://www.vox.com/2018/2/6/16973928/house-democrats-republicans-2018-midterms-fundraising

        • Andre 6.2.1.1

          None of that is incompatible with the idea that the vast majority of Repug pollies have much more to fear from a Trumpkin primary challenger than from a Democrat opponent. There’s just no electoral upside for a Repug pollie to do the right thing and stand up to the mandarin Mugabe. There’s only self-respect and integrity reasons to do it, and those don’t count for shit, especially among Repugs.

          By the numbers, let’s say Dems pick up 64 House seats. That’s still roughly 180 that will have returned a Repug. Let’s say the Dems keep all the Senate seats they have in heavily Trump-voting states, plus perform beyond anyone’s wildest dreams and pick up another 3 off the Repugs. That would still be 5 returning Repug senators.

          NB: the Dems flipping 3/8 Repug incumbent senate seats while retaining all of their current seats would be a better proportional result than the Repugs got in 2010, where they kept all their incumbent seats and flipped 6/19 Dem held seats.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2010

  6. adam 7

    Lourdes Ramirez is one brave soul who we should thank is in the profession of journalism. Just a small account of what she faces.

    https://www.icij.org/blog/2018/02/death-threats-scare-tactics-honduran-reporter-perseveres/

    Just in case you missed it, a global strike against a cross border multinational. Anarchist ah, they keep thinking people who are poor and downtrodden around the world have more in common, than they do with the elites and their middle class sycophants.

    https://libcom.org/news/deliveroo-global-strike-01022018

  7. Ed 8

    Canaries in coal mines.
    Fish in water.

    Climate mate change catastrophe.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/349877/fish-dying-thanks-to-unusually-hot-summer

  8. Ed 9

    George Monbiot on twitter.

    “Stock markets slide for a day. Result: mass panic and wall-to-wall coverage.
    Soil is sliding off the land worldwide, threatening the entire basis of human survival. Result: indifference, no coverage.
    What is salient is not important
    What is important is not salient.”

  9. Looks like the crown has stoped my give a little page as I first feared ECO MAORI knows that there are many ways to solve a problem and I will never back down there actions show the CROWN IS JUST A TOOL TO SUPPRESS US MAORI people.
    The CROWN is shitting there pants and they should .
    Ana to kai This has made me more determined to Drag there ASSES over the hot coals of a COURT HOUSE and watch them jump up and down as they get burned Ka kite ana

  10. This shows that my words of this Justice system being a farcical tool for the rich to HIT the poor on the HEAD with its powers The WHOLE WORLD IS wacthing this .
    ANA TO KAI

  11. Jack Ramaka 12

    Caption “Sucking on a Heinie – Like Mother’s Milk – Nectar from the Gods.”

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts