Paula Bennett: Govt’s biggest loser

75 comments on “Paula Bennett: Govt’s biggest loser ”

• Comments are now closed

1. AmaKiwi 1

   16 August 2012 at 9:25 am

   Mr. Shearer, What are you going to do?

   If I were a Labour MP, I would stage a boisterous demonstration on the floor of Parliament demanding that a minister who claims it’s OK for her to violate the Privacy Act is unfit and must be removed. Bells, whistles, flag waving, etc.

   The Speaker would eject me and my colleagues, which is just what we want because we will all be on the 6 o’clock news.

   No. That might be too politically effective. We’d better just put out a press release.
   • tc 1.1

     16 August 2012 at 9:39 am

     It’s a brilliant strategy the duck/pagani etc have hatched of doing absolutely nothing and letting the incompetance and arrogance of this corrupt government bring itself down as the MSM will hound them out of office with their persistence, objectivity, targeted investigative work and oh wait a minute that’s the Oz media…..damm.

     \
     • infused 1.1.1

       16 August 2012 at 10:36 am

       Another week of Labour doing nothing…
   • blue leopard 1.2

     16 August 2012 at 2:22 pm

     @ AmaKiwi

     Good point.

     Do any of our politicians care about ordinary New Zealanders?

     (The doubt implies the answer)
2. Salsy 2

   16 August 2012 at 9:41 am

   Okay so I read some gossip on facebook …But sounds like Paula Benebasher’s week might get even better – rumours of [deleted] She almost rotten enough for Act. Im sure she wont mind if the details of her own personal history come oozing out this week… Someone give Garner a ring, he publishes gossip right?

   [Sorry folks, I’m going to clean this comment and replies up to remove the allegations and names. Please stick to the politics, not the personal. Thanks – r0b]
   • AmaKiwi 2.1

     16 August 2012 at 9:44 am

     Sounds like fun. Who is [deleted]?
     • Lightly 2.1.1

       16 August 2012 at 10:13 am

       [deleted]. It’s well known that Bennett’s first position in the National Party was [deleted].
       • Roy 2.1.1.1

         16 August 2012 at 10:57 am

         Mental picture of [deleted] – arrrggghhhh, need brain bleach!!
   • King Kong 2.2

     16 August 2012 at 10:56 am

     The title of this post is funny because Paula Bennett is extremely fat and ugly…genius.

     Salsy’s insinuation that [deleted] also works because she is a woman.

     Stay classy.
     • Roy 2.2.1

       16 August 2012 at 11:05 am

       Actually it is also impugning the sexual morality of [deleted]. didn’t you notice that?
       • King Kong 2.2.1.1

         16 August 2012 at 11:09 am

         No. But that makes it ok.

         I guess he was [deleted].
         • McFlock 2.2.1.1.1

           16 August 2012 at 4:07 pm

           🙂

           I have no idea what the original comments were, but the suggestion that someone was “deleted” seems to take rumour-mongering to a new level.
                
            
     • Daveosaurus 2.2.2

       16 August 2012 at 8:12 pm

       That, of all the genuine reasons to be disgusted by Paula Bennett, you can only think of her physical appearance, says far more about your own character than it does hers.
   • toad 2.3

     16 August 2012 at 11:15 am

     Puhlease!!!

     There’s plenty of political ammunition to attack Paula Benefit with. Personal and sexist stuff about [deleted] is more like the tactics of the right.

     I’m disappointed to see it here.
     • Kotahi Tāne Huna 2.3.1

       16 August 2012 at 11:28 am

       Ditto.
     • Jackal 2.3.2

       16 August 2012 at 11:56 am

       +1 Don’t waste the mods time.
3. Salsy 3

   16 August 2012 at 9:52 am

   From Wikipedia

   Bennett worked as an electorate secretary for Murray McCully, National Party member of Parliament for East Coast Bays, until the 1999 general election. She then worked as a recruitment consultant for several years and assisted McCully in the 2002 general election campaign.
4. aerobubble 4

   16 August 2012 at 9:52 am

   she won’t say sorry, she was caught cheating, she’ll do it again.
   Kid caught cheating at scrabble, hoarding blank pieces, was thrown
   out of the world tournament. Belorus athlete claims Gold despite
   being caught out. Bennett investigated political opponent private
   information for titbits, and then used them, spun out of all
   reason, to the great detriment of a beneficiary. Do you see
   the pattern. Kid immediately thrown out of the tournament.
   Gold medalist will eventually have to give back the Gold medal.
   Minster Bennett won’t even say sorry. They all cheated, the
   closer to power they are, the more powerful they are, the
   less responsibility are held up for. Banks signed a document
   that stipulated he did not know where the donations came from,
   despite haggling over the amount personally with Mr.DotCom.
   Is it just me, or does Key have no backbone, does he just hope
   his Ministers find a backbone and resign, like the former
   ACC minister? Wait for his minister to find a backbone, such
   a nice Man. Recently Key was called a simpleton by a grieving
   mother, nice men are often just that, simpletons. would
   explain Keys inability to explain the global economic crisis
   was based as it was on neo-liberalist simplicity. People
   assuming their plane was safe at Fox Glacier, Ministers
   assuming they were doing nothing wrong when breaching
   privacy, buildings were certificated aka ctv.

   Minister Belorus says, they all cheat too, so she can?
   Routinely we hear stories of beneficiaries not behaving
   themselves, not being moral, ethical. Getting a golden
   ticket, subsidies to education, then when they win the top
   position, they claim that others who seek to beat out them
   are cheaters, and so its okay to cheat to show them up on
   the day. Bennett was accused of hypocrisy, that she got
   the support to enter education, and now was stopping women
   like her, doing the same, they are cheaters damnit.

   Yes, you got it, win Gold, then claim all
   gold winners where cheaters, and so you must win Gold. Yes,
   you got it, Bennett claimed the beneficiary was misleading, then
   by exposing the beneficiary details given in confidence to
   Bennett’s department, breaching her duty of care, Bennett
   unrepentantly still believes she should win by cheating, AND
   will do it again. Higher standards in education, yet educating
   us all by their behavior, that in power you can breach privacy,
   and when caught, will do it again given the right circumstances…
   WTF. Abuse of power. How do we trust National on education
   standards, when the effects of education, the consequence of education,
   in power, it shows no education, no morality, no ethics.
   Its like a Belorus athlete who cheats and then claims the
   last Gold medal was a cheat too, and so should keep their Gold
   as all athelets cheat????

   Minister Belorus.
5. Anne 5

   16 August 2012 at 10:16 am

   The timing of the publication of these investigations have started to fill me with suspicion. Either they turn up at inconspicuous times such as just before a public holiday (Xmas & Easter are popular choices) or the media is drowning in other high profile stories or – as in this case – John Key is out of the country so gets out of having to front up.

   It has happened enough times now to make me wonder whether the authors (including the police) are getting a quiet ‘heads up’ when to release them. They would all feign shock, horror at such a suggestion of course but that doesn’t mean a thing.
   • andy (the other one) 5.1

     16 August 2012 at 10:40 am

     +1
   • Jackal 5.2

     16 August 2012 at 12:03 pm

     It does seem rather convenient and protecting brand Key would be all important to Nat spindoctors.
     • seeker 5.2.1

       16 August 2012 at 6:46 pm

       I have similar thoughts to yours Anne. Have waited nearly four years to hear it judged by law that Bennett in fact broke the law – and they try to spin it away.

       I hope that it will not be so easy to brush this criminal act under the carpet. After all this was a damaging attack perpetrated on a vulnerable solo parent ( vulnerable because she was a nursing mother of a wee 6 year old ) by a powerful minister of the crown just because the minister was upset by said parent’s correct, imo, criticism of her.

       Have never recovered from the fact that a minister of the crown (so called “honourable”) would attack her own people who she is meant to protect . And when finally judged for it -says she didn’t agree that she did anything wrong and would repeat the offending again.! What an example to set, saying she is above the law and it cannot protect us from her!

       We are not safe while people like her are in power. She has to go. She has to go.
6. Robert Winter 6

   16 August 2012 at 10:32 am

   I have little time for Ms Bennett, but some of commentaries associated with this post are unfortunate, and cross a line that is important in decent politics.
   • weka 6.1

     16 August 2012 at 11:53 am

     Normally I would agree with that Robert. However….
      
     Bennett has basically just said that she will release the private details of any beneficiary, and do so in breach of the privacy act, whenever she wants. The government is basically blackmailing the country now – if you speak up, this is what you can expect and we don’t mind breaking the law to do it.
      
     I’m not sure you can get much more serious than that in our kind of democracy.
      
     In light of that, if people want to throw around personal details of Bennett, then it seems legitimate. She has to go, and while I wouldn’t say by any means necessary (eg I think her child should be kept out of it), but she is an MP for god sake, and her past is as relevant as any of the other MPs whose pasts have come back to haunt them.
      
     Personally, I think the worst thing said about Bennett in this thread is that she is ‘extremely fat and ugly’. There is a degree of misogyny in that comment that creates problems for all women, not to mention tedious fat phobia. Calling Bennett a whore isn’t an insult, except to sex workers.
      
     I do think people are treading a fine line with libel though.

     Edit: I see r0b has removed the libelous information.
     • toad 6.1.1

       16 August 2012 at 12:03 pm

       I get your point, but if some on the Left compete with Bennett in the race to the bottom by revealing personal information about her, are they any better than she is?

       Fair enough to bring MPs’ personal lives into the public debate if it exposes hypocrisy (e.g. those taking a public homophobic position having covert gay sex) or if they have broken the law, but those are about the only circumstances I think it is justified.
       • weka 6.1.1.1

         16 August 2012 at 12:53 pm

         There is a difference between the personal information of an MP, and the private information held by an agency and protected by law. This needs to be well understood. No-one in this thread came close to what Bennett has done in abusing her power. So, no, I don’t think this is a matter of the left sinking to Bennett’s level. Were they to go after her family, or release information protected by the privacy act, then maybe, but even then it’s not going to carry the seriousness of her abuse of power. We’re not on an level playing field here, which is the whole point of having a Privacy Act.
          
         I do think in general that in NZ we are fortunate that MP’s private lives are generally not considered relevant eg Lange’s long term affair while PM was well known but not public (although now with the internet I guess it would be). But where an MP abuses her power in the way that Bennett has, then it’s appropriate to put the heat on. There are limits – I don’t agree with misogynistic attacks, nor personal abuse of her.
          
         btw, one of the allegations made that has been removed was an illegal activity at the time (it is not longer). It was the one you referred to in you comment 😉 And we all know Bennett is a hypocrite, do I really have to point out the examples?
       • tc 6.1.1.2

         16 August 2012 at 3:29 pm

         It’s that inability by Labour to fight fire with fire the NACT rely on.

         So they do whatever they like, which having no significant moral standards that’s quite a bit, knowing the sheeple suck it up, the dog whistles excite the rednecks and the MSM are on their side so never pull them up.

         Labour under DS is exactly what they wanted, Bennett’s opposite if DC was in charge would be mauling her now and if not DC would be addressing it whereas we have questions in the house whoop dee do. The Nat’s show 2 fingers to the house and Locky boy tidies up after them.
7. BillODrees 7

   16 August 2012 at 10:39 am

   Read the following traits and score Belorussia Bennett (or your boss/neighbour) on 0,1 or 2. 
    Personality “Aggressive narcissism”

   Glibness/superficial charm

   Grandiose sense of self-worth

   Pathological lying

   Cunning/manipulative

   Lack of remorse or guilt

   Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)

   Callousness; lack of empathy

   Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare_Psychopathy_Checklist

   Belorussia Bennett displays many of the behaviours of a species of psychopath.

    
   • Draco T Bastard 7.1

     16 August 2012 at 7:29 pm

     No need to slag off a whole country just because one of their athletes fucked up.
8. Tombstone 8

   16 August 2012 at 11:04 am

   Does the Labour Party still exist? Hello?
   • fatty 8.1

     16 August 2012 at 12:30 pm

     The continued popularity (or even acceptance) of piggy bennett exemplifies the failure of Labour. Bennett’s career as a politician should have finished years ago.
     • tc 8.1.1

       16 August 2012 at 3:36 pm

       One of many failures by labour

       How many lies have nat ministers made in the house yet most folk think it’s courtroom styled honesty and dignity as nothing is said beyond the events of the session to bring them to account so they keep on telling porkies.
9. starlight 9

   16 August 2012 at 11:35 am

   How about we all get together and get into labour politics,at least there will be action
   and condemnation of a raft of nacts policies,the shsh politics of the current labour
   administration leave labour followers dismayed at the lack of any opposition or do
   we accept that labour now are a branch of nact,nact lite.
   Yes i agree if bennett sees no problem with her releasing details of beneficiaries then
   she will have no problem with the release of her past details,right.
   The longer shearer and labour leave any forthright opposition by the wayside the
   more labour voters will look for another home to rest their vote,ie greens,mana.
10. Carol 10

    16 August 2012 at 11:43 am

    Well let’s see how these questions play out today:

    http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QOA/2/f/3/00HOH_OralQuestions-List-of-questions-for-oral-answer.htm

    2. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Ministers; if so, why?

    4. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by her answer to oral questions on Tuesday that “There is in New Zealand no actual poverty line” and “I do not see the measurement as a priority”?

    5.Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he agree with the statement made by the Hon Bill English, in relation to the release of Natasha Fuller’s private details by his Social Development Minister, that, “People who enter into public debate are welcome to do so … and should provide their full information to the public”?

    10. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Women’s Affairs: Is she satisfied with the action this Government has taken to improve the lives of women in New Zealand?

    11. JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: Is she concerned that Wellington Rape Crisis is shutting its doors one day a week because of funding shortfalls?

    And will the Minister front-up to the House?
    • gobsmacked 10.1

      16 August 2012 at 2:59 pm

      Robertson and Norman both did a good job (admittedly, Brownlee is a pretty hopeless stand-in for PM). Actually the oppo did well on a number of fronts – low road (Winston) to high road (Cunliffe).

      Robertson’s question about confidence in Ministers was exactly the same as Shearer’s yesterday – except Shearer didn’t use it to ask about Bennett, even though the news had already come out. But he can only cope with rehearsed questions, can’t think on his feet, so an opportunity was missed (again). Not good enough.

      Bennett was really pissing off Lockwood today!

      (PS Well done to the mods for the deletions earlier, we don’t need another Kiwiblog)
      • Carol 10.1.1

        16 August 2012 at 3:03 pm

        Yes, the opposition MPs did better today than Shearer yesterday.

        And the tag-team supplementaries from more than 1 Labour MP and Peters on the shortcomings of various ministers certainly kept Brownlee on the hop.

        Also Norman did well on the series of questions relating to the Fuller-Bennett issue.
    • xtasy 10.2

      16 August 2012 at 8:19 pm

      Russel Norman raised one scenario, mentioning a person and name, who raised issues with Housing NZ, and I would have thought he got evidence and more, to perhaps nail Heatley also!

      Then he raised other possible scenarios, but did not deliver any “document” of any sort “by tabling it”.

      I had hoped he had something, where a person made complaints, and where every evidence may have been overwhelming that breach of privacy was repeated by another minister.

      Sadly that did not eventuate.

      Hipkins raised a similar case scenario, but it was a bit unclear, as there was talk of a teacher complaining to Parata (Minister for Education), upon which she wrote to the board of the school he worked at.

      It sounded close to convincing and proving a breach of privacy, but it was too vague to nail Parata.

      I am sure that there are indeed breaches of privacy going on every day, same as there are cases of “compliancy” with the Privacy Act every day, as Brownlee claimed, but the proof must now be delivered.

      It was a good day for the opposition, for sure, and they must keep it up and do even better, then they will hopefully make more headway.
      • Carol 10.2.1

        16 August 2012 at 9:11 pm

        Hipkins explained about it on Red Alert this afternoon:

        http://blog.labour.org.nz/2012/08/16/bullying-tactics-an-abuse-of-power/
        And on the Labour Party web site – looks like a press release:

        http://www.labour.org.nz/news/bullying-tactics-an-abuse-of-power

        But I don’t know why he didn’t produce evidence…. unless it would identify the teachers involved?

        Not sure why he didn’t question the minister directly.

        Although a series of questions to the PM in the House today looked like an attempt to portray bullying/privacy breaches as endemic to the National government.

        Hipkins ends his post/press release with a comment that indicates this might be the aim:

        “How can members of the public have confidence that their views are respected by this government, when teachers have had their privacy breached by the Minister of Education, when beneficiaries have had their personal information splashed all over the media by the Minister for Social Development, and when claimants to ACC can have no confidence that their sensitive information won’t be emailed all over the country?

        “The Prime Minister must move immediately to reassure the New Zealand public,” Chris Hipkins said.
        • xtasy 10.2.1.1

          16 August 2012 at 9:57 pm

          “Although a series of questions to the PM in the House today looked like an attempt to portray bullying/privacy breaches as endemic to the National government.”

          I have assisted a person with Housing NZ needs last year and early this year, also raised issues with WINZ at a high level last and this year, and the treatment was abysmal in general.

          If you dare to take them on: Do your homework, gather all info, record every word they and you say, it is like a German type “gestapo” or “stasi” treatment which they use, so if you do not do your “homework”, they will dismiss you, off-load you and even make you look like a cheat and abuser.

          A friend of mine suffered very serious housing issues, living in a horrible damp, unsuitable room in an over-crowded boarding house, while Housing NZ tried to fobb him off. We phoned the staff at Housing NZ heaps of times. They never did anything. So when frustrated, just “raising” your voice (no abuse or any unacceptable behaviour) suddenly led to the call centre staff threatening to cut us off, as we were supposedly “threatening”.

          They train their staff to be over-sensitive and even manipulative, so if frustration is mentioned, they can just cut you off! That is Housing NZ, whom I call “Unhousing NZ” these days!
      • Crashcart 10.2.2

        16 August 2012 at 10:38 pm

        The problem is there wasn’t even one mention of it on TV1 news. I don’t know about TV3. It does no good to have a good day in the house if the only ones who know about it are those who follow these blogs or watch parliment TV. Labour need to be getting in front of the camera and hammering the message.
        • gobsmacked 10.2.2.1

          16 August 2012 at 11:02 pm

          Agreed. The chance was yesterday – Bennett was headline news, and (as usual) Labour’s cumbersome machine couldn’t respond on the day.
          • xtasy 10.2.2.1.1

            17 August 2012 at 12:34 am

            All they need is to “connect”, to be honest!

            There are hundreds, if not thousands, out here, who may not be Labour members, or any other party members. The idea of “good organisation” means (the commies and even the NAZIs knew that very basic skill) is to ORGANISE! To contact, to communicate, not necessarily expect much, but to be IN TUNE and the CONNECT with your people around you, that is what counts and makes things work!

            This is where Labour is failing.

            The Greens do it differently, they are into cyber space and online networking, but that at least works. I could start to get Labour off the bottom tomorrow and have it perform admirably in 6 monthys, but they all know everything better, right?

            HC
        • DJ 10.2.2.2

          17 August 2012 at 2:18 pm

          “if the only ones who know about it are those who follow these blogs or watch parliment TV.”

          You mean you sad fucks who actually think your opinion on here counts? Who actually think that your prescious little eco climate here means anything to anybody in New Zealand other than your little band of brothers.

          I have said it before on here, good luck with your revolution. The rest of us laugh at you …….
      • Carol 10.2.3

        17 August 2012 at 8:21 am

        A teachers’ spokesperson is on RNZ right now, saying he has the letters and is concerned about Parata’s apparent privacy breach.
    • OneTrack 10.3

      17 August 2012 at 8:27 pm

      Is question time in the house a complete waste of everyones time and well past its use-by date? It has just turned into some sort of expensive pantomime which achieves nothing. Questions like these, and the answers they received, just confirm it.
11. tracey 11

    16 August 2012 at 6:14 pm

    its possible to be outraged with her behaviour without personal attacks.

    some of you have standards as low as those you criticise. two wrings dont make a right anfd those who stoop epitomise whats wrong in this countru
12. McFlock 12

    16 August 2012 at 7:49 pm

    It’s when they commute from their home suburbs to clean the offices and homes of tories.
13. captain hook 13

    16 August 2012 at 7:52 pm

    she is just in there to make mcully look good.
    if they didnt have a complement of drongos then their whole ball of wax would just melt and fade away like a puff of dust.
14. xtasy 14

    16 August 2012 at 8:06 pm

    This cannot be further away from the reality at all, as the headline above tries to imply.

    Bennett has not ended up losing, she is audaciously laughing at us all, and especially at many beneficiaries, because she has got away with a heck of a lot, and neither the mainstream media, nor her party colleagues put on any real pressure on her to face the music and resign.

    I hate to disappoint, Bennett is perhaps being “reprimanded” of sorts by Speaker Lockwood Smith this afternoon, for behaving “worse than a 3 year old child”, while issues about her answers were attempted to be addressed, but that was it, and she got away with giving evasive, meaningless answers to Jacinda Ardern during question time once again.

    The problem is much, much greater than the person Paula Bennett, the problem is the societal reality, the crap media, the only in part performing opposition, the indifference amongst the largely brain-washed, indifferent, purely “survival focused” majority of the beneficary community, and a vast share of the populace, who have for years been “conditioned” and divided to simply have NO time for beneficiaries, for their plight, whether privacy is breached, WINZ commissioned doctors make biased, illegal assessments, thus over-ruling usual doctor assessments, whether poverty affects 20 per cent of children, or whatever.

    Does anybody but a minority really care?

    Does David Shearer apologise for his bit of bene bashing in his Nelson speech to Grey Power?

    I see and hear nothing, it is all a “side show”, I am afraid, and Bennett does not give a damn about the law, because she knows:

    1. Her government tells beneficiaries to shut up or else, as they should appreciate the bit of help they get;
    2. the private and neglected public media are pre-occupied with selling advertising and neglect informed, true, critical journalism;
    3. the rules affecting beneficiaries are being tightened every year, so most fear repercussions if they speak up and out;
    4. legal aid has been cut back to a degree, that almost no lawyer is prepared to take up a case for a beneficiary to represent her/him against injustices and law breaches by MSD or WINZ;
    5. MSD and other government department, ministries and agencies always keep the upper hand, should a disgruntled, badly treated citizen ever take legal action, as once it is filed, and if it looks serious, they will come and offer a “settlement” of sorts, enter negotiations (taking months or longer), and eventually wear out the aggrieved, as the law says that settlement comes before proceedings, so they will eventually “buy” the plaintiff(s) off and get the matter out of the courts.

    In reality, you cannot win, if you are a beneficiary in NZ. You are at the bottom, exposed to kicks, pushes, submission, ill-treatment, discrimination and contempt from too many in society. That is NZ 2012!
    • Colonial Viper 14.1

      16 August 2012 at 8:24 pm

      Fortunately, the oldest political party in the country, Labour, stands up strong for the downtrodden, those in poverty and the unemployed.

      Oh wait.
    • weka 14.2

      16 August 2012 at 9:05 pm

      6. Beneficiary advocate organisations are struggling. Still don’t know what happened to the Wellington People’s Centre, but I remember the benefit cuts and other govt policy in the early 90s had the flow on effect of undermining the areas of activism served by beneficiaries and other low income people. It feels very similar now.
      • xtasy 14.2.1

        16 August 2012 at 9:09 pm

        weka – have you heard about a lot of community law centres now forced to close down? Also have I learned that there are more pressures on budget advisory services and other agencies that used to assist and support poor, whether beneficiaries or low paid workers.

        This covernment I call “the Government of the Grim, Mean and Evil Reaper”, who is swinging his blade to cut, cut, cut and cut all those away, he or she hate/s!

        A bit like the guillotine rule of “the right” – hitting the poor and powerless!
        • weka 14.2.1.1

          16 August 2012 at 9:57 pm

          That’s right!
           
          7. reduce funding to CLCs, and replace direct contact with call centres.
          • xtasy 14.2.1.1.1

            16 August 2012 at 10:05 pm

            Call centres like Housing NZ ones, aye? Waiting up to 45 minutes or so, getting indicipherable staff trying to say something, the fobbing off to try another number or service perhaps?

            Also try the Citizen’s Advice, already (against their will) inudanted with WINZ beneficiaries told to go there (at least in parts of Auckland) for help with food parcels and so forth!

            And then now legal aid, which is so tight, a good lawyer I know told me, she could certainly not sign up with them again, as the costs would far outweigh what she could get back from Legal Aid.

            As a poor person in NZ, National is expert at making you “feel” the way you are, damned “poor” and powerless, sort of “screwed”, “fucked” and worse, all in one, while you have NO say.

            Now do I trust Shearer will make the big change? Maybe talk to the golf, football and bowls club members under the hill in Mt Albert, about safe retirement?

            Go get lost, Labour, I will NEVER vote you again, unless a miracle happens!
            • xtasy 14.2.1.1.1.1

              16 August 2012 at 10:16 pm

              And I did not even mention my complaint to the Office of Ombudsmen, that I filed in mid Feb. 2012, to address the refusal by ADHB for not making available info under O.I.A. and also Privacy Act, about a patient who was left in the trust and care of a person abusing her.

              So that, as I just found out, was left lying in the office for 6 months, not “progressed”, as they had lack of funding, “restructuring” and a “back-log” building up.

              Another matter I raised is with the Health and Disability Commissioner now for over one year, yet another matter is before another body, and NOTHING is done, “progressing” and being resolved.

              So with all this happening due to “funding cuts”, what do you think of the remnants of “governance”, “accountability”, “responsibility”, “due process”, “democracy”, “free speech”, “scrutiny” and “democracy” in NZ?

              It is more like corruption, negligence, contempt, and certainly a “dismantling” of the system that should be upheld in any free, law abiding and responsible society in the world!

              Thanks NatACT and a gutless Labour led opposition!
        • North 14.2.1.2

          16 August 2012 at 10:18 pm

          And Weka – have you heard that experienced legal aid lawyers in Northland are getting out in worrying numbers ?

          Leaving the representation of poor people to lawyers with relatively little legal experience.

          Not because they’re greedy but because they are somewhat mindfucked at already modest incomes nowhere near the 100 grand being slashed by 50% and more as a result of changes in criminal legal aid.

          You know, the changes Dame Margaret Bazley and Boofhead Power promised would retain experienced lawyers in legal aid, and indeed would attract increased numbers of experienced lawyers to legal aid.

          Cynical, soundbite lies !

          Oh well, who cares…….more raw material for their private enterprise buddies when they privatise all the prisons.
      • xtasy 14.2.2

        16 August 2012 at 10:35 pm

        As I have been told: Wellington People’s Centre” had to close, due to financial problems!!!
      • xtasy 14.2.3

        18 August 2012 at 12:52 am

        Today I saw the Wellington People’s Centre’s website active again, after it was not accessible at times over recent weeks. Maybe they are just rearranging their offices and centre?

        It seems they are still operating after all, contrary to what I had been told.
15. captain hook 15

    16 August 2012 at 9:02 pm

    she may have had a job here and there but she has never actually produced anything of value.
    she is just a user trying to hide her uselessness behind a welter of abuse to those who cant fight back.
16. North 16

    16 August 2012 at 9:55 pm

    Today in Parliament Mr Speaker rebuked Minister Portly Slug Benefit for behaving like “a three year old”.

    Would one of you clued up political people tell me the last time any Mr Speaker in any parliament anywhere rebuked a Minister of the Crown for behaving like a three year old ?
    • weka 16.1

      16 August 2012 at 9:59 pm

      I’d like to know that too (although they appear to act like badly behaved children all the time)
    • xtasy 16.2

      16 August 2012 at 10:30 pm

      A ‘three year old” or person of such description, would and should not meet the legal (or for that sake even “other”) requirements for being a “minister”, I am sure!
17. xtasy 17

    16 August 2012 at 10:27 pm

    Having found out more today about MSD’s system of using “Regional Health Advisors” and “Regional Disability Advisors” (since 2007 and a separate system of staff not even mentioned in the Social Security Act), where they try to over-rule medical assessments by GPs, doctors and specialistst, who have competency and expertise in assessing the clients they have dealt with for years, and also MSD using designated doctors of their choice and “training”, they have certainly been exposed with wrongly assessing a seriously incapacitated applicant for the invalid’s benefit in Southland as of recent!

    More of this may well soon be reported in the media, but I have been informed of a range of legal breaches, that are also happening under THIS minister, who employs and relies on a heavily biased, work focused “Principal Health Advisor” by the name of Dr David Bratt from Wellington.

    I have inside info, that will prove what went on there and in the past, and being in contact with an MP, we look forward to expose MSD’s and Bennett’s unfair, unjust and in parts illegal practices even further!
18. monique 18

    17 August 2012 at 5:03 pm

    People can find out how much a person gets on the benefit at any time. I am so sick of all this muck raking by a group of whingers with nothing better to do than make personal attacks on someone who worked her way into where she is. Maybe some could learn from it. At least she has a job and not collecting a benefit and blaming everyone else for decisions made.. There is far too much of a culture of “the world owes me a favour”. Enough tall poppy syndrome already! We should be more outraged the woman was able to get a $10,000 payout from WINZ to start up a business and doesn’t have to pay it back. Fact is, if the taxpayer pays your income, we have a right to know just how much WE are paying you
    • gobsmacked 18.1

      17 August 2012 at 5:47 pm

      Monique

      Please provide full details of your support from the taxpayer.

      Thank you.
    • mike 18.2

      17 August 2012 at 6:00 pm

      Yeah that stupid Human Rights Commission, what would they know about … human rights…
      • Carol 18.2.1

        17 August 2012 at 6:21 pm

        And WINZ code of conduct guaranteeing privacy is just for show and really means nothing:

        http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/individuals/your-rights-and-responsibilities/our-service-charter.html

        You have the right to:

        be treated with courtesy and respect
        cultural sensitivity
        use any of our services
        be given information about the services we offer
        be given correct information and entitlements
        be listened to
        be given fair, non-judgemental service
        have your information kept private and confidential ….

        … and more rights listed at the link.
        • mike 18.2.1.1

          17 August 2012 at 6:53 pm

          (Imagined phone conversation between the head of WINZ and Paula Bennett.)

          “Hey Paula, you might want to read this… Yeah it’s on the WINZ website… Start your browser… Click on the WINZ icon… The yellow one… Yes I’m sure it’s there I made it hot button on your browser when I was last in your office… Got it? Go to our service charter… Yes we did put it on our website, it wasn’t my idea, sorry Paula… It turns out the Human Rights Commission was right after all… I know, so weird… Slow down, did you say delete it?… I’m guessing Carol from The Standard has already cut and pasted it… How do you want to play it?… OK so we just carry on with the ‘I do not agree with that view’ line until the spin team comes up with something better… I guess it’s worked fine so far… How about you start talking about drug-testing the peasants again?”
          • Carol 18.2.1.1.1

            18 August 2012 at 8:08 am

            @mike, LOL. 🙂

            and a 🙂 to Anne, below.
    • xtasy 18.3

      17 August 2012 at 9:44 pm

      monique: Well, what about the staff that WINZ and MSD employ as “Health Advisors”, “Disability Advisors” and also case managers and so forth? They make decisions about other people’s ill health, in some cases overrule regular doctor’s recommendations and reports and rely on “designated doctors” who get TRAINED by MSD, to deliver the decisions they expect.

      I think it is fair to ask MSD and WINZ to disclose the exact medical and other qualifications of the staff mentioned, as for accountability, transparency and other reasons, the public has a right to be informed about this, for the safety of clients they make decisions over.

      Yet MSD does all to not make such information available.

      I have info about a Disability Advisor who is called a “specialist” advisor and makes decisions about clients’ health and supposed ability to work, while that person does not even have proper medical qualifications. Yet she is allowed to “advise” case manager about clients’ “ability” to work – based on medical information.

      Strange all this.

      But the ignorant, fed misinformation and denied information by the media for so many years now, make such nonsensical comments as you have made.

      It is a bit like the blind leading the blind, I suppose.
    • Monique Watson 18.4

      18 August 2012 at 8:41 am

      I’m with the other Monique. I don’t think the Fuller woman was worried about the consequences of bleating to the media in the first place. She was quite happy to talk about her income originally. Then she gets all pissy when Bennett releases the full picture. It’s not like Bennett released the details of someone who hadn’t been to the media first. Fair cop.
19. Anne 19

    17 August 2012 at 7:09 pm

    Slow down, did you say delete it?… I’m guessing Carol from The Standard has already cut and pasted it…

    Very funny :D. What’s more it might be closer to the truth than we know.

    Carol is a treasure!
20. Meinke 20

    17 August 2012 at 8:14 pm

    Can one only declare such a reduction to find someone who really understands what theyre discussing on the net. You need to discover how to carry a worry to light and earn the idea essential. Lots more people should look at this as well as appreciate this aspect with the account. I cant feel you aren’t popular when you absolutely hold the reward.
    • mike 20.1

      17 August 2012 at 10:02 pm

      Absolutely. My cat dribble wonton over a hot blue flame. A thousand pillars of salt couldn’t wrestle with a gang of laptops communicating via chickenwire.

      Is that you William S. Burroughs?
      • Tim G 20.1.1

        17 August 2012 at 10:57 pm

        Classic 😉

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS