Posts by Rosemary McDonald
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to Angela Hart,
There is a little confusion with the terminology used during this entire process....ramped up more during the Spencer case. I am not sure the source of the confusion...but ...when they talk about 'benefit' they are actually meaning the payment for providing the assessed level of care.
The wage paid to the carer from the funding allocated to the client from MOH:DSS.
Not a benefit from WINZ.
Or the case would have been Spencer v Ministry of Social Development.
Margaret Spencer did have engagements with WINZ...as we all have had ...and some of those engagements were, no doubt, hmm, unhelpful.
This is a very important distinction.
The Powers That Be would have the narrative say this issue is about benefits...it is not, and never has been.
This issue has always been about a client of MOH:DSS not having the right to choose a resident family member as the deliverer of the disability support they have been assessed by the NASC as needing.
and...the person who is proviiding the disability supports that the MOH:DSS client has been assessed as needing should be eligible for payment, regardless of their family status.
Sorry to be pedantic...but these are important times...and it is up to us to keep the narrative real.
P.S. The original Atkinson clients were subject to similar 'abuse' from people in authority during their long and protracted process.
Those of us who have stood firm firm against the Ministry and their contracted providers have also been subject to a level of bullying and criticism.
The price one pays for holding to the original principles.
-
Well, well, well.....
Our Friends on the Bench have delivered a full frontal criticism of the Part4A ammendment of the PHDAct.
"It contained a number of features that are traditionally regarded as being contrary to sound constitutional law and convention –"
"The draconian measures introduced in s 70B(2)(c) to remove rights of challenge for breaches of family care policies said nothing about the Atkinson policy and we cannot be expected to strain the statutory text to remove all retrospective rights of claim arising from that policy."
"While both counsel accept that the courts must respect and apply pt 4A, like any other legislation, we agree with them that if
the words have not achieved the result which its promoters intended the courts should not seek to fill the gaps as a means of dealing with inadequate drafting.""Winkelmann J held that if Parliament had intended to take the unusual step of retrospectively reversing a finding of inconsistency by the Tribunal, it could be expected to do so deliberately and to have used express and unambiguous language."
Sorry for the long post....but this IS Disability History.
-
Envirologue: Too Big to Fail – Why…, in reply to Steve Rowe,
you could forgive them for being more strident but of course they must remain professional
And Jim Salinger has more reason than most to be strident. Great to hear his voice again.
-
Hard News: Will the grown-ups ever…, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
All language is magic.
Don't waste your wit on twits,
Don't waste your wit on twits,
Don't waste your wit on twits,
etc. -
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to Sacha,
Actually, one of the lawyers on the 'good' side used to be a lawyer for the MOH.
Oh, the irony.
Again, the judiciary did their job....and applied the Law.
This will go to the Supreme Court, methinks.
-
The can gets another kick....
https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/from/decisions/judgments
AG for the MOH v Margaret Spencer....Appeal Dismissed!
-
Hard News: Will the grown-ups ever…, in reply to fredster jones,
Watched that show Rosemary.
Maybe....but did you actually listen to what the people said?
I doubt it.
Because you still don't get it.
The only narrative is not yours.
As yet, and I'm sorry (not really) if it disappoints, but the rest of us are allowed opinions too.
-
Back to the show....
I think Ali Mau speaks for many at around about 13.00 mins in this....
https://www.maoritelevision.com/tv/shows/media-take/S01E001/media-take-extended-interview-0
I wonder.....?
-
Access: It’s just a bout of Chronic Sorrow, in reply to Hilary Stace,
Taking the risk to show a bit of vulnerability has not resulted in the scorn I sort of expected.
As if, Hilary!
So often we feel we are the only one with such thoughts. We're not, and the really important thing is that we talk about these feelings, thoughts, issues.
The message that comes through to me is that STILL the supports are simply not there for a large number of people....both disabled and family....despite what the 'authorities' would have us believe.
Peter and I went to a carer meeting some time ago and the assembled were told that we "only had to ask "to get help.
A number were rolling around on the floor at that one.
It is here where the reality lives.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to John Farrell,
And the feedback before the 8am news was mainly from people protesting that it was last weeks news and not important.
And even I would understand it makes sense for Natrad to read out those 'negative' emails to avoid being accused of bias.
The interview stands on it's own.
Give 'em enough rope....