No Way Back.

Written By: - Date published: 6:58 pm, August 9th, 2017 - 79 comments
Categories: election 2017, Metiria Turei, Politics - Tags:

A close family member told us (Checkpoint) today that extended family members had found the last few weeks “galling” listening to Metiria Turei’s claims she had committed benefit fraud because she and her young daughter needed the domestic purposes benefit to survive.

The family member strongly refuted this, telling Checkpoint Ms Turei’s daughter Piupiu was muuch loved and supported by extended family including paternal grandmother forme North Shore Mayor and Labour MP Ann Hartley.

The text continues for a few short paragraphs.

My initial reaction is that what the family member’s said could be parsed any number of ways and could have been occasioned for any number of reasons.

But regardless of how I or anyone might read it, the fact is that there’s no way back from that kind of statement, no matter what explanations that are thrown at it.

Basically I’m just gutted that Metiria’s gone from parliament. That said, parliament isn’t where our politics are formed. And parliament isn’t where our change comes from. Those things always have and always will rise up from the streets.

Parliament merely responds.

79 comments on “No Way Back.”

  1. BM 1

    I don’t quite understand why Turei did this benefit confession thing?

    Her whole story seems to be complete horse shit, she’s destroyed the Greens, her career and her relationship with her extended family, did she not think this stuff would come out?

    • lprent 1.1

      It was already harder for non-superannuant beneficiaries. That was pretty much the point wasn’t it.

      The extended family members weren’t living with having to make completely meaningless excursions to WINZ to sit around and state that their circumstances hadn’t changed. Or trying to make a benefit even with supplementary housing try to cover rents, shoes and school fees.

      After watching my sister have to try to raise two kids under 5 while trying to get a qualification (with all of the childcare required to make that happen) and to get ready for work when they finally went to school – it was an impossible task in the 1990s and even worse now. And that was with a lot of family support including me living with them for several years.

      Basically your opinion is a meaningless chicken shit. You have no idea what you are talking about.

      • patricia bremner 1.1.1

        Well said Iprent. “walk a mile in my shoes”

      • Steve 1.1.2

        If you are so ‘poor’ you should just not be having kids . . . .simple!

        • Philip Ferguson 1.1.2.1

          And Steve, if the poor don’t have kids, where will the next generation of workers come from – y’know the people that create the wealth that will pay for your old age.

    • Her whole story seems to be complete horse shit

      And that would be why it didn’t resonate with so many people right?

      Oh, wait…

      Toward a Theory of Backlash: Dynamic Resistance and the Central Role of Power

      Abstract:

      To understand backlash theoretically, we must first carve out an analytically useful term from the cluster of its common political associations. In colloquial usage, “backlash” denotes politically conservative reactions to progressive (or liberal) social or political change (Faludi 1991 is a classic in this vein). Here, however, we attempt a nonideological definition of backlash embedded in a more neutral approach to its study. In colloquial usage, backlash includes acts of genuine persuasion as well as of power. Here, however, we suggest that it may be analytically helpful to confine its meaning to acts of coercive power. We draw on the sociological literature on social movements and countermovements, as well as the political science literature on power, preferences, and interests. We focus mostly on examples drawn from the United States and relating to feminism and gender. We begin where the process of backlash itself begins, with power and a challenge to the status quo.

  2. Carolyn_nth 2

    When the daughter’s father’s family start attacking a political leader via the media, I don’t see any way they can adequately respond.

    Whether it’s true or not, allowing that kind of argument to continue in the public domain would only be very hurtful to the daughter.

    Turei said in the Checkpoint interview tonight that she got practical support from the Hartley family, but never financial support.

    Clearly some people in the media and social media believe her, some don’t.

    But, it is the end for Turei in politics.

    She actually was the main reason I have voted Green in recent years. Now I feel I have no reason to vote – though I always vote…. and will make my choice before election day.

    Turei consistently campaigned against poverty and for low income families whether working or on benefit.

    She was a beneficiary advocate when she worked as a lawyer.

    I always felt the media and even some lefties undervalued her as leader, too often treating the male co-leader as the MAIN leader. And more inclined to favour the guy talking abstract economics and business stuff, compared with talking about people’s daily lives and struggles.

    Parliament needs more people strongly and personally committed to bringing about both social and economic justice. And it needs more people from working class backgrounds.

    • Sabine 2.1

      you say it so much better then i could.

      yes, i have run out of people to vote this election.
      not an easy choice to make come election day.

      sadly Non of the above is not yet an option.

      • Union city greens 2.1.1

        So why can’t you vote green, again?

        A non vote for change is a vote for national.

        • Sabine 2.1.1.1

          i come have come to the believe that this country needs another 3 years of National.

          so i will wait and see what will happen until election date.

          but as it stands i have no ‘person’ to vote for. I am not keen on J.A and her male co-leader. Least but not all for them throwing the M.T under the bus, but also because i consider both National light. and I see no reason ever to vote for the light version unless its very much needed. I think this year they might have the National swing voters they need to win, so i don’t have to vote for and I won’t. that is a given.

          as for the green party, we will see what they will do now.

          at the end of the day there is always this little party legalise aotearoa, who among all the political parties is the one that has a policy to at least keep people out of prison, create a new cash crop that are not cows, and would create tax income and business opportunity and maybe even take money away from our ‘criminal elements’ (not sure if our political system is not he biggest criminal element).

          so its not said that i won’t vote. I simply said that I have no one to vote for.

          • Union city greens 2.1.1.1.1

            I can’t understand the sudden negativity for the greens because MT decided herself to resign. The party is more than one person… Unless it’s NZ1st or Top.

            Enjoy ticking the blue box, then, but because you are, it does limit your credibility and opens you up to claims of hypocrisy should you comment for progressive causes.
            Your non vote or wasted vote hurts the very people you claim to want to help.

          • Matthew Whitehead 2.1.1.1.2

            You don’t feel like Marama Davidson is very likely to continue Metiria’s work as a senior Green Party member?

            • Carolyn_nth 2.1.1.1.2.1

              I certainly do.

              Though don’t want to put too much pressure of a legacy onto the shoulders of a newish MP. Glad she made it into the House for the term just ending to get some important experience. So last election produced a very good result for the GP, even if they still remained in opposition.

            • Sabine 2.1.1.1.2.2

              I have no issue with Marama Davis. IF she does not get run down by the machine as was done with M.T. However i think while she is okay now she will be good in a few years. We will see. But as of now, she is no M.T. She might never be and frankly she should try to make her own way.

              M.T. spoke about something i know. I know having to make last a handful of dollars a few days. I know about hunger, cold, and being so focused on making 10 bucks last a month that no other thought was possible. The frenzy in your mind to find shelter, eat at least something and not be molested at night time in the flat, street i found shelter. I am not in this position anymore, thankfully i was homeless in a different country with more option to get out of the mess – in my case it was employment offering board and accommodation. But, M.T. for once gave voice tho those that everyone in NZ wants to be quiet. And i can understand why. The system as it currently is needs to have at least a quarter of the population to be in poverty if the rest is to have a decent living standard. Why? Because some want a 4 car garage rather then all having a home. Sacrifices must be made and it ain’t the chattering classes or our esteemed Politicians that are making them. So yeah, i will wait and see what the greens will do. Today, i will simply mourn the slaughtering of a good women at the altar of greed, avarice, vanity and self importance.

    • Visubversa 2.2

      The house at 27 New Bond St which was shown on TV the other night as the house where Metiria enrolled to vote in Mt Albert, was bought for her, and the baby’s father by the Hartley family. The relationship did not work out and Metiria went her separate way. She should have talked to the Hartleys about this whole thing before she went public. She should also have contacted WINZ and arranged a repayment before she made the speech. It was just really badly managed which meant that the good intentions got lost in the shitstorm that followed.

      It is about political management.

      [please provide a back up for the facts being claimed there. If it’s a video please provide a timestamp too. Putting you in moderation until then – weka]

      • Carolyn_nth 2.2.1

        Turei did say she talked to family before her speech. I don’t know what family members she talked to.

        I’ve seen enough of families in different times and places to stay out of family conflicts. Each side believes they are right. You get different versions of the same events. And people do tend to take sides after relationship splits. The tensions can accumulate.

      • mpledger 2.2.2

        If that’s true and she did live there at some point (for at least a month) then she didn’t commit electoral fraud.

        • James 2.2.2.1

          That is true – but it would have made her benefit fraud somewhat more substantial from her admission.

          So I think she went with the “lesser”

  3. Chuck 3

    Check Point – John Campbell was about to blow wide open Turei’s lies. The extended family had enough of the shit she was saying.

    • reason 3.1

      If we want to hear shit then we’ll listen to what chuck is saying …..

      When is Bill english resigning from parliament …. for his $32,000 greed and lawyer driven accommodation scam ??????????

      Wayne Mapp was in on the ‘free’ taxpayer money as well …….

      “He confirmed the apartment was owned by his superannuation trust and was rented to National MP Bakshi Singh, for $400 a week.

      As an MP Mr Singh can claim up to $24,000 year in accommodation costs from Parliamentary Service.

      Dr Mapp also collected around $700 a week for his new larger apartment and said he could see why his rental income should be used to offset his expense claims.” https://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/tag/wayne-mapp/

      At least we get to see a clear bold example of one law for the rich …. and hanging law for the poor

      • Wayne 3.1.1

        reason,

        I will actually answer this.

        Yes, my Superannuation Scheme did own that apartment. When I became a Minister I rented it out. I could have rented it out to anyone, but in fact I rented it to Kanwal Bakshi Singh since it was conveniently located to Parliament.

        All of this was, and indeed is, completely legal.

        In fact the concept of MP’s using their Superannuation Scheme to buy property was first devised by the Green Party. They made it clear to other MP’s this was an appropriate investment of superannuation funds. As I recall they all grouped their funds together and bought a commercial property in Wellington. It was then rented to the Green Party to be their head office. It would have been a requirement of the FMA that the rent be a commercial rent. In fact various Green MP’s advised other MP’s of what they were doing, suggesting that this was a better way to invest the superannuation money than giving it to a fund manager.

        The issue that you are referring to was not that the Superannuation scheme owned flat was let out. It was that Ministers had ministerial apartments while their personal superannuation scheme also owned property in Wellington. It was ultimately considered best if the Ministers stayed in their Superannuation scheme owned apartment.

        I would note that it is requirement, by the FMA, that any superannuation owned property must earn income at a commercial rate. The FMA audits schemes to ensure that this happens. So rent was paid, using the accomodation supplement. The accommodation supplement can be used to pay rent, or if the property is directly owned by the MP, to pay the mortgage, rates and interest.

        This has been done by MP’s from every party in parliament and for many decades. However the accommodation supplement is not available to MP’s who come from Wellington.

        It was a variation of this that affected Bill English. Since he was the MP for Clutha Southland he has a house there (and presumably still does) and as a young MP he and his wife and young children lived there. But it became more convenient for them to shift to Wellington. He was advised that he could still claim the AS available to all MP who did not represent Wellington electorates.

        Anyway, why all this explanation? Because all the MP’s from whichever Party were acting within the Rules. No-one was breaking the law. And that is the difference.

        But for Ministers it became politically embarrassing to be in a Ministerial apartment while their superannuation scheme owned a flat in Wellington. It would be just too hard to easily explain it. People without a good knowledge of superannuation investments in property would inevitably draw adverse conclusions, whether justified or not. It was a classic case of “explaining is loosing”.

        I would note that In contrast investing the same money with fund mangers would have gone completely unremarked.

        So we changed the rules so that could not happen. Ministers had to be in their Superannuation scheme owned flats.

        I would note that in the old days Ministers used to entertain people (overseas visitors etc) at home. That no longer happens, so a large apartment or house is no longer necessary for that purpose.

        • adam 3.1.1.1

          Well reading your response made me sick wayne. What a corrupt lot of plonkers you all are.

          • lprent 3.1.1.1.1

            He did a pretty good explanation. Given the generous super funding and salaries it is fairly obvious that MPs will accumulate capital. The reasons for them to be funded well is exactly the same as for judges; it diminishes the temptations towards corruption. Given the choice between living in a corrupt country with poorly paid MPs, judges, police and other positions with too much power, and living in one where a few get generously funded by the state – I prefer the latter.

            Of course that doesn’t diminish our responsibility to hold the bastards to account. Especially when comes to their often clear lack of responsibility for dealing with the losses of human potential through dumbarse short-sighted policies more grounded in bigotry and electoral self-interest than a clear understanding of the long term costs. But that was why I got interested in politics in the first place. While I didn’t want to have anything to do with it, it is clearly too important to be left up to the politicians.

            Which roughly translated means that I think your comment was short-sighted and quite stupid.

            • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.1.1.1

              Given the choice between living in a corrupt country with poorly paid MPs, judges, police and other positions with too much power, and living in one where a few get generously funded by the state – I prefer the latter.

              Unfortunately the latter doesn’t appear to be reducing the corruption much if any.

            • Jeremy the self righteous twat 3.1.1.1.1.2

              I remember reading somewhere a long time ago that backbench MPs in the 60s-70s (and before) were paid the same as experienced teachers.

              Plus the usual perks that seems fair to me. The current salaries seem very high and reverting to the above would certainly mean some more rational Parliamentary salaries, or huge pay increases for teachers!

              • reason

                Wayne.

                Far to much justification ………. and as usual you leave out important facts…… distorting things….. painting a false picture ……

                You and your sort have long history of doing that ….. ” The most disturbing fact that emerged from Don Brash’s leaked emails was that all his advisors knew that what they were saying about Maori privilege was false ” https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2017/07/29/breaking-willie-jacksons-explosive-orewa-speech-attacking-don-brash/

                So I dismiss Waynes honesty regarding the greens, who he constantly misrepresents ….. and has even called them the “green Taliban” …. not to be confused with 3 year old Taliban who wayne has also hunted…… and misrepresented

                From my memory green MP’s were bending rules to fund raise for the party … from their own salary packages …. They did not have the million dollar funds and dodgy backers of national http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/donation-raises-more-questions-for-national-2014050217

                “Until now, we could have been right in thinking the “charity” auction was for so something like the Starship Children’s Hospital, rather than a fundraiser for National…..But asked directly yesterday if the golf auction was a National Party fundraiser, Key said “probably”

                http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/8515361/Money-trail-leads-home-to-New-Zealand

                http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10416871/New-Donghua-Liu-donation-uncovered

                http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11763071

                On every scale Wayne mapp and Bill english have offended far more than metiria ….

                Motivation : ……. rich persons greed versus poor solo parents need.
                Size of offending : $32,00 versus what? $ 3000
                Ones actions committed 20 years ago as a beneficiary versus 9 years ago as a minister of the crown. etc

                or as others put it ….

                “Here are some other conclusions.

                1) Bill English must have known that he and his family did not live in Southland. But the system allowed him to pretend that they did, and he took advantage of that.

                2) He got away with it by arguing that his lawyers had told him it was OK.

                3) When he was found out, the system continued to protect him.

                In those three things lie the true differences between what Bill English and Metiria Turei did.

                First, Turei gamed the system because, she says, she felt she needed to for the sake of her child. English simply saw an opportunity to make money and took it.” …..https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/09-08-2017/the-sins-of-metiria-bill-and-john-sense-checking-the-fact-checkers/

                The very generous MPs ‘Accommodation allowance’ was supposedly to stop those not residing in Wellington from Losing money ,,,,,, representatives not residing in Wellington would not be left with a smaller take home pay….. from personally paying the extra expense of working away from ‘home’.

                It would have been sold as a allowance to ensure fairness among MP’s pay …. if the public questioned the reason for its existence……

                But Bill English and yourself exploited loopholes to enrich yourselves…. Loopholes make all sorts of things ‘legal’ for the rich and greedy …..

                They are the very essence of Waynes and Bills ‘broke no laws’ hypocrisy.

            • adam 3.1.1.1.1.3

              I really did mean ALL, and it was not a personal attack on wayne. I actually appreciated he took the time to respond.

              But it did, and still does make me feel sick, I feel worse reading your take on it. Because if we pay them the big money is to stop corruption, then why does it feel like the are all pushing right to the edge of corruption to make a few extra bucks?

              • lprent

                There is a clip side. Because they are paid well and done so with relatively minimal risk, then the risks and potential costs of going and doing something dodgy are pretty damn high.

                Whereas if they were paid peanuts and expected to make up their income from the perks of the job (as happens in a lot of countries) then you can reasonably expect some very costly corruption. More importantly there is absolutely nothing that prevents it from snowballing to even higher levels of corruption, and it spreads out into society in just about every way possible.

                Either way gets you people who have a strong vested interest in the current system – which is mostly what I suspect you are objecting to. But the second way causes some really strong extortion on those who can afford it the least. They are the easiest to roll for whatever change they have because they have the least means to prevent it happening.

                Neither is a perfect option. But when you focus on alternatives that don’t require large numbers of people to act like saints, something that is highly likely to happen (see the reality of every revolution that ever happened), then there are few viable alternatives. Most involve either computer support that we don’t have or police states that have other issues.

                • While I agree that ensuring that people are paid well can reduce corruption what we’re seeing from National shows that that isn’t enough. There are still people who are simply corrupt in the echelons of power and no amount of money is going to change that. In fact, paying them such high rates probably makes some of those people even more corrupt.

                  Blinglish shouldn’t have been able to claim that he was living in Dipton – he hadn’t lived there for years and probably was glad to see the back of it. Then there’s his handling of the Barclay affair and the continual lies of John Key.

                  We need to look at the laws and how they’re failing. We need to make sure that immoral actions actually are illegal and that when an immoral action is shown to be legal that we change the law rapidly enough so that it doesn’t happen again.

          • Jpo73 3.1.1.1.2

            Seems reasonable to me and good on him for replying.

        • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.2

          What would be a difference in cost if the government built a multi-level apartment building that out of town MPs could stay in.

          There’d be no rent and no mortgage to cover. There would be maintenance but that should be less for one building than many scattered around the city and staff for services.

          And, at the end of an MPs career the taxpayers don’t have to turn around and buy a new set of buildings for the new MPs to make a profit on.

          I suspect it would be much cheaper than the present system by several million dollars per year but I also suspect that nobody’s looked into it properly.

          The MPs housing scheme is a great example of: Legal does not always equal right.

        • dukeofurl 3.1.1.3

          As for Bill English, it just repeats the nonsense about him ‘living in Southland’

          Before he was selected as the national candidate Bill lived in Wellington with his large family as he was a treasury bureaucrat and the chair of the Hataitai branch of the national party too boot.
          I understand he left Dipton to go to boarding school in Wellington at around 13 yrs old. Followed by University at Otago and Victoria

          Lets not play the game it was ‘more convienent’ to move from Dipton to Wellington- they never left Wellington in the first place. His kids had the schools in the capital and his wife had her GP practice there.

          Almost no MPs move their entire familys to Wellington from their electorate, that only happens once they were ministers. Mps get a Wellington accomodation allowance, even though English wasnt really eligible for that either, as his permanent residence was Wellington. The fakery continued to make him ‘eligible’ for the higher ministerial accomodation payments by pretending the family trust wasnt a financial interest of his.

          The house in Dipton was his parents family home, while his brother Hamish took over the running of the family farm and had his own house. Once the parents died the the family homestead was cut out from the farm and passed to Bill English. But he essentially never made it his family residence

    • mauī 3.2

      No surprises there Chuk you already believe the story of someone you’ve never heard of over the countless stories of one of the most professional politicians we’ve had in Parliament the last 15 years.

    • Jeremy (not the sel-rightous twat) 3.3

      Alternatively, a Dirty Politics operative offered a financial incentive to “an extended family member” to undermine Metiria.

      • Jeremy 3.3.1

        Just reinforce my image:

        You spelt self righteous wrong. Very wrong.

      • dukeofurl 3.3.2

        Metira was doing the undermining herself. Once the Hartley family was bought into it they were bound to say ‘we didnt let our grandchild go hungry’

  4. Exkiwiforces 4

    Jeez, the Greens are kicking more own goals than a under 6 Football (Soccer for the uneducated) team ATM.

    What’s next for the Greens?

    • Union city greens 4.1

      If they’ve any sense, a lot of good policy, their best people grafting at the coal face, and an extra large supply of organic ginseng so Shaw can run the leadership campaign of his life.

      • Exkiwiforces 4.1.1

        Well they better pull something out of the hat then and for our shake it better not be a rabbit or we well be up to our neck in cow poo. BTW I’m not a Greens supporter.

        • Union city greens 4.1.1.1

          No tricks needed, just quality product.

          And taxes for farm poo. heh

          • Exkiwiforces 4.1.1.1.1

            I think they are stuff now and think any good policy they pull out of the hat will not trusted or as they say here in Oz it won’t pass the pub test from now on in.

            Trust is something you earn and when you break it, it’s hard to get it back.

            Our only chance now is Labour to maintain its momentum like a rampaging panzer armoured army group at a shell shock National party and its flanks aka Greens, NZF etc don’t lose anymore ground.

            This election is going to be a tight one from now on and we can’t afford anymore own goals from now on.

            • greywarshark 4.1.1.1.1.1

              exkiwiforces
              Trust? You don’t know what you are talking about. In NZ we have no idea who should be trusted and just look for the coolest and richest. We have had our economy and NZ culture totally changed in the last 3 decades, and all while we were trusting someone to do better, and to keep their promises and that it would all work out right.

              Now we have just got into the mentality that someone is set up in the media as a patsy, and everyone is invited to throw custard pies at them, so to speak. And lucky if there is only custard in the pies. Some of them can really dent.

              You can notice from the mean little-minded criticisms that happen here.
              The morons have been invited to have a go, and they are happy to gather round and let her have it. Having no standards of behaviour themselves they can get very worked up about spurious lapses when encouraged.

              • Exkiwiforces

                Yes, that’s why I punched out in 20th Apr 98 as I couldn’t stand more, it was not the NZ that I grow up in and the only stable job I had was the 4 and half yrs in the NZ Army. Before that bouncing between jobs or the dole and I probably could speak for most people here being on dole etc was bloody hard in the 90’s Trust in pollies is bloody hard and it isn’t help by this shit and the muppet national party of the last 9yrs.

                I’m in two minds atm in regards to the to poor lady from the greens from a moral and ethical pov. Because I can remember the 90’s all to well and we all have reasons in what we thought was the our best course of action at that given time hers and mine. sometimes hindsight is a wonderful thing.

                • I’m in two minds atm in regards to the to poor lady from the greens from a moral and ethical pov.

                  Read this and you’ll likely be able to resolve the conflict.

                  • Exkiwiforces

                    Excellent link, DTB and thank you.

                    That’s why I a moral and ethical issue because I knew afew females who have done almost same thing in the suburb in the Hornby area where I use to live and what age you are. Being on welfare under National in 90’s was almost sub human in the way we were treated and some did stuff that wasn’t sqeakly clean, even my grandmother moved my trust account of out my name that was set up by my great grandmother to my parents so I could get ahead in life.

                    I’ll rather leave it at that.

                • Exkiwiforces

                  FYI, Metiria Turei and I almost the same vintage, I’m 43 and she is about 1-2 years younger than me or older not sure. She has lost her job that she probably enjoys and she try her bloody best for a better NZ. I’m about to lose my job that I enjoy and I try to make a world better place as a peacekeeper ( I always want to be peacekeeper, besides wearing the glengarry/ black beret or the blue beret of an Aussie rock ape) and I now have a host of mental health problems to boot related to my peacekeeping tours. How do you think I feel ATM with these two muppets about throw nukes at each other and they about 8hrs flying time nth of Darwin as the crow flies. The last time two clowns did this was probably in your era.

                  • dukeofurl

                    Not going to throw nukes at each other. NK always talks fire and thunder all the time, the people close by in South Korea dont care as they have heard it many times.

                    Trump is just being Trump

                    • Exkiwiforces

                      Sounds like you haven’t heard the Book called “The Boy who called Wolf”

                      For starters we have: two irrational leaders
                      Asian countries/ people don’t like losing face
                      Both are gamblers
                      Both have Nukes
                      I posted this comment last night

                      “I wonder if Trump knows that all Asian nations don’t like too lose face and if he does it’s a stupid way to play chicken with old fat boy, who might just push that big red button for shits and giggles.”

                  • RedLogix

                    My respect and regrets ex-k.

                    I’m not surprised to read how your years in the services has harmed you. Human society has always thrown lives into the fire to suit it’s purposes, and then while willing to loudly respect the dead after, where entirely less keen to honour the damaged and dented.

                    • Exkiwiforces

                      Thank you for those kind comments

                      My tours to the Middle East Region, I could handle as it was more of a Fly in Fly out (FIFO) as Air Security on the Transports or ISR (over Land or over sea) missions on the Recce birds and Army Politics forbid us from go outside the wire (spent 21 days sitting on my bum at main Aussie base in the Gan) with the Airforce’s Chief Airfield engineer to sort the dust problems with LZ’s at Forward operating bases where the army was which BTW that was a very easy problem to fix.

                      But the Peacekeeping tours are the hard ones and the worst to deal with. If anyone here or tells me that Peacekeeping is safe and easy then they reading to many books or have rocks in their heads and are telling porky pies because they aren’t.

  5. mpledger 5

    It will be interesting to see if all the people going after Metiria Turei will start nosing into Bennet’s former life with just as much dedication.

    • Korero Pono 5.1

      +100, they’ve been unsurprisingly quiet on Paula Bennett. And National appeared surprisingly quiet on Metiria, or did I miss something?

  6. Venezia 6

    I see the trolls are out having a field day. I also note Julie Anne Gentners comment on twitter that she believes this continuing feed to the media to pressure Metiria is part of a dirty politics campaign. A replay of 2014?
    Whatever it is there is no way a politician can counter unsubstantiated claims from
    (?disaffected) extended family members – totally unfair and out of bounds.

  7. esoteric pineapples 7

    Maybe she did get help from her family. But so what? Maybe it was still hard to make ends meet. I know lots of New Zealanders wouldn’t see it that way, but anyone who has been on a benefit or minimum wage will know this as a reality.

    • Bill 7.1

      Financial help from a family member would be regarded as income and entitlements reduced accordingly.

      That’s how utterly fucking fucked the WINZ regime is.

  8. greywarshark 8

    listening to Metiria Turei’s claims she had committed benefit fraud because she and her young daughter needed the domestic purposes benefit to survive.

    But did Metiria say all this:

    1 She committed benefit fraud. Yes, she admitted that she had.
    2 That she was looking after her young daughter and needed the domestic purposes
    benefit [for her living costs]. Yes.
    3 That she needed the DPB to ‘survive’. Did she say that? If she had been destitute family would have helped no doubt.

    I don’t trust emotionally-laden language as ‘survive’ is.

    • mpledger 8.1

      You can reasonably expect a relative to give you some money every now and again but not every week. She was from a working class family – they probably didn’t have it.

      • You can reasonably expect a relative to give you some money every now and again but not every week.

        Not really and it’s a blatant abuse by the government to expect them to do so.

        And, again, the person on welfare needing to get help from family is proof that the welfare cheque isn’t enough.

  9. greywarshark 9

    What a shame that Ann Hartley could not have just talked to Metiria. If she had just said no comment it would have been wise. She has been around politics for long enough to know what etiquette is and what is wise when dealing with the media.
    Just talk to Metiria why didn’t you? Send her an email telling her how you felt and asking her to call you. Try supporting her instead of being defensive.

    • Is it known for certain that it was Anne Hartley who contacted Checkpoint?

      • greywarshark 9.1.1

        TWW
        True the family member is not named. Was it right for the media to pass on such secretive information, that was scuttlebutt to use an old term. Should they not have named their informant instead of spreading possible lies? Is Checkpoint likely to report everything they hear, like a shitty tabloid? Or did they say that the person named themselves, and then asked to remain anonymous?
        And did they say that they had checked with informed people to ascertain the status of their source?

        I did jump to conclusions which was wrong. But this is what happens when rumours abound, Checkpoint should front up about how much they know about this person’s reliability and their name. At least to state the closeness of the family member, and whether they were supporting Metiria or trying to diss her would be a good question to ask. And what detail could they give or was it just a loose annoyed opinion?

      • Karen 9.1.2

        I know for certain it wasn’t Ann Hartley.

    • The Lone Haranguer 9.2

      Its a bit unfair to blame Ms Hartley when theres no proof at all that the comments came from her.

      And the media never hang their informants out to dry, because if they did they wouldnt get any fresh meat.

      And they live on fresh meat

    • mpledger 9.3

      And that’s why we need the DPB because solo parents need protection and independence from in-laws with an axe to grind.

      • Korero Pono 9.3.1

        Yes my thoughts exactly, someone had an axe to grind. This whole debacle is getting curiouser and curiouser.

        • dukeofurl 9.3.1.1

          “need protection and independence from in-laws with an axe to grind.”

          They are getting a house and additional financial support- that some axe !

          [if you want to make statements of fact, please back them up with something reliable (links/videos need cut and pastes or timestamps) – weka]

      • Sabine 9.3.2

        not only from in-laws but also from immediate family.

        there are a lot of broken families out there.

        • dukeofurl 9.3.2.1

          In politics never never make yourself the poster child for a particular policy. There are just so many more people in hardship.

          It was always going to end up mostly about MT rather than solo mums. Unfortunately her hardship story had some wrinkles- thats why politicians should never do it.

    • James 9.4

      Because she (if indeed it was her) disagreed with what was being said and wanted to set the record straight.

  10. Delia 10

    This is all unbelievable, beneficiaries can be invalids or parents, or looking for work, they do get help be it emotional or financial from family. Usually it is in small ways. Whatever, no one knows how much Metiria got financially, if at all, it was one relative’s words. I do not think Metiria did this right, but the back lash has been OTT and with precious little facts to.

  11. Delia 11

    Metiria’s big crime was to tell the truth about the second class New Zealand citizens, the beneficiaries, their regular humiliations, their continual struggle to make ends meet without insufficient income and the invasion on their private life by WINZ in case they get a few extra dollars in the bank. Shot the messenger.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Labour Ministers of the Crown announced
    Today caucus has elected the 21 Labour Ministers of the Crown who will serve in the new government’s executive, says Labour Leader Jacinda Ardern. “Across the board these members have the experience, expertise and drive I want in our team ...
    2 days ago
  • Agreement with New Zealand First to support a Labour-led Government
    Labour is pleased to have successfully concluded negotiations with New Zealand First as a critical step to forming a Labour-led progressive Government, says Labour Leader Jacinda Ardern. “I thank the New Zealand First Party and Leader Winston Peters for agreeing ...
    3 days ago
  • Bird of the Year – Loving Aotearoa
    I love that I live in a country where there is a competition for ‘Bird of the Year’. Right now, around New Zealand, there are teams and campaigns promoting the attributes of our native birds; from the famous kākāpo creeping ...
    GreensBy James Shaw
    5 days ago
  • A Post Election Update
    It’s the start of another week and I wanted to give you a quick update on what’s happening in relation to our efforts to form a new Government for New Zealand. We’ve been working hard to ensure that the issues ...
    GreensBy James Shaw
    7 days ago
  • Labour welcomes final election results
    Today’s final election count has strengthened the mandate for change, and for negotiations to continue in earnest, says Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern. “We congratulate Angie Warren-Clark on becoming Labour’s 14th additional MP, which expands the Labour caucus to ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Lewis Moeau – he aituā, he aituā!
    Kua tau ngā pōkeao ki runga i te marae o Te Poho o Taharākau ki roto o Manutūkē, oti rā ki runga o Puketapu me Manawaru, ngā maunga tipua o te hautipua kua riro nei. E heke ana ngā roimata me ngā ...
    3 weeks ago