Time for a tune?
.... Seymour on Morning report ..... have an open mind..... euthanasia bill – yet .... Metiria ..... slinging mud of dubious provenance.
Another odious oik ....
Yes, curdled the milk in my ricies it did...
Perhaps, and this is only a suggestion mind, since Metiria has actual lived experience of her hobby horse...surviving on a benefit...shouldn't Seymour do likewise with his?
Now of course I'm not suggesting that he end it all. Of course not.
But while he sits smug in his snug world of privilege, gloating on the political demise of one who presumed to open up the festering wound that is poverty and inequality in Godzone, beneficiaries have died for the sins of WINZ.
I would certainly not use that expression. I am hopelessly and irrevocably cynical about politics and politicians, but I do try to keep up.
I've watched the GP morph from sandalled, herbalist activists with a refreshing 'I'll dress how I damn well please." attitude, to the smooth, polished, scripted product that graced the cover of this glossy glam mag.
Assuming that any speech delivered in public by candidates is thoroughly vetted by the 'comms' team, discussed in depth with the party's tacticians...how on earth did they think this would play out...especially for Metiria?
Undoubtedly, Metiria revealing her past indiscretions while struggling on the DPB will have helped the GP to reconnect somewhat with those that might have felt alienated by the sophisticates in the N&S tableaux...it has not made Metiria's position more secure.
The more I think about it...the whole thing smacks of an attempt to deflect a possible shit storm.
If Turei has a PR advisor I hope she’s fired them already.
Has someone raised the idea that perhaps Turei was tipped off that enemies were going to spill the beans about her 'past', and she chose/was advised to 'confess' and try and extract a bit of political mileage in the process?
Dark, dirty politics.
Personally, as much as I am able to 'like' any politician....Turei is one of the more personable and believable ones. I sincerely hope the wound is not too deep...she still presents as green...rather than the paler shade adopted by many of her party colleagues.
It seems every statement the Ministry makes must be carefully scrutinised, the public can no longer be confident of the integrity or accuracy of the information the Ministry provides to the Courts.
So it was back in 2008 when Atkinson was heard at the HRRT. Economist Brian Easton assisted the OHRP by scrutinizing the data used by the Mystery of Health to demonstrate that paying resident family carers would bankrupt the country...I editorialize... but the Miserly and the Minister (Ryall) did brandish some very large and scary numbers based on the data.
The Mystery's guy, de Raad, used two tables...one from the 2006 Survey and one from the Misery's own records. There were significant discrepancies twixt the two, especially regarding the numbers of those with severe disabilities who were not (if the MOH numbers are correct) receiving any funded support because family were doing the work for nothing.
And as a consequence, allowing family carers to be paid (should the sky fall and the Atkinson Plaintiffs win) the cost to the government would be fiscally unsustainable.
And this is the excuse the bastards used to justify the Part 4 amendment to the PHDAct.
Easton's evidence to the HRRT is well worth a read. One observation he makes is that the Statistics New Zealand 2006 Disability Survey is based ...
on subjective self-categorisation, here there is a tendency to overstate needs relative to what an objective assessment might conclude. Such a conclusion is more consistent with common sense.
and further, and fortunately....
It is not necessary for this case to reconcile the tabulations for the purposes of this claim. Suppose the Ministry of Health is failing to identify large numbers who are entitled to its support services. That is clearly a matter of public policy concern, but it is not the focus of the claim which is about those who are in existing receipt of support.
VII. In the event that the Tribunal’s decision were to encourage others in need to apply for their support entitlements, then while this may be fiscally expensive, this reflects neither a change in the policy framework nor the Tribunal’s decision but a reduction in the failure of delivery coverage within the framework
Atkinson was specifically concerned with those with disabilities with high/very high support needs.
The people who without a competent person available on a daily basis to meet at least their core care needs and are totally reliant on an unpaid family carer need to be enrolled with their local NASC.
If there are thousands of disabled people with the absolute need for a very high level of care who are not at least enrolled with their local NASC and been through an assessment process to ascertain the level of support they require, this is as much an indictment of their unpaid family carer as it is of the 'system'.
Failure to acknowledge the level of dependency a loved one has, and their extreme vulnerability if as a carer one is suddenly unable to meet their care needs would be, in my humble opinion, bordering on irresponsible.
When Peter and I officially shacked up (for want of a better expression) in April 1999 we advised all relevant officials but made sure that contact with our NASC was maintained.
Just in case.
(And Peter and I would be the first to acknowledge that engaging with one's NASC can be difficult to the point of boiling frustration and near blinding rage. They are a necessary evil. They are the only portal through which one can access any disability support, so it seems they feel they can treat folks like shit.)
Never underestimate the power of “Teh stupids” to give it a try. ;-)
Not the first time this bridge had become a pathway for two wheelers. Way back, in the post war era, an old friend was horrified when neighbours informed her that Number Two Son, all of eight years old, had 'ridden the humps' on his bike whilst mum was at work.
(Simpler times back then, when kids were more able to free- range)
Coincidentally, as you were taking your photos Russell, I was driving our Bus through The Tunnel.
I have a more than slight tunnel and bridge phobia...so Peter, as The Navigator, tries to desensitize me by plotting journeys so they encompass as many of these structures as possible.
So, Friday we did the Waterveiw....and either I'm in recovery, or this is an especially well designed piece of infrastructure. The lanes were well wide enough and the tunnel well lit. The slight curve and incline thing was quite cool. I'm not overly convinced that we had a quicker journey from SH16 to the Southern MWay but it was a different and not altogether unpleasant experience.
One day we may find parking so we can spend a while checking out the wheelchair accessibility of the Topsides.
Oh, the "feathery" things....they are (rather nasty) spikes to prevent ijits from climbing up and over the bridge....I think.
I guess anyone who is interested has already perused the latest system transformation plan....
But disability was unwelcome and immigration acts banned ‘cripples, idiots, lunatics, infirm, blind, deaf and dumb’.
Anyone like to bet on when Aotearoa will welcome those perceived as less than perfect?
Thank you Hilary, again.
(You are writing a book, no?)
Pigs can fly!!!
A wee while back I made what I thought would be a futile OIA request to the Misery of Health for more information about the 272 MOH:DSS clients who had resident family members as their paid carers as told to the Human Rights Review Tribunal in 2008 during the Atkinson hearing.
These are now being referred to as "non compliant service arrangements".
Anyway...if anyone is interested....the file is attached.
Will discuss further later on....now we are temporarily back in the Waikato with 24/7 wifi!