Oh, it gets better – there are pros and cons, but the govt is re-opening the debate about providing choice of mainstream or segregated education for disabled children.

Obviously I'm getting cynical in my old age, but I'm betting there will be less not more funding going into it at…

This decision is simply evil. There is no other way to describe it. Learning NZSL – an official language of New Zealand – is not a luxury.

For these people, it is a necessity, vital if they are to get along in everyday…

Government is cutting support for teaching deaf children.

Gosh. I don't even know what to say. And it's only four teachers. It's probably the equivalent of every Government department doing without buying their own $4 wall planners or something.

I am being slightly facetious, but only slightly.

Minister of Disability Issues Heather Roy said it would be "inequitable" for the Government to fund only one of New Zealand's two sign language teaching providers.

Yes. What a conundrum. If only there was another option other than cutting funding from one of them. If only.

the National Government is cutting support for teaching deaf children

Well aint that ambitious for New Zillund

This makes me so upset. Few things are more important than the right to education, and the right to language and speech. And those rights are being denied, without a thought or care.

And I probably do mean ring-fenced and capped. So can be spent on certain things not others eg vacuuming but not shopping support even if it…

Ring-fenced usually means separated out so it can't be spent on other things. Doesn't convey the nub of the problem which is the funding being determined not by the level of need but by political whim and bureaucratic fancy.

Look…

A person-centred system would look at what the person wants in order to improve…

It has distorted what the government agencies focus their energies on too – saying no rather than yes.

Wondering how we got to this point and reflecting on history.
1938 Social Security Act – First Labour Govt strong on principle of taxation on ability to pay, in exchange for free care when you need it.
1972 ACC began…

The…

Im a bit lost by Phillip refeering to a situation when you are hit by a bus and who will or wont be paid to care for you.
Its obviously an accident so is covered by ACC.
Is it just me or is he being deliberately misleading.

Why would I…

The tribunal is part of our legal system and their judgement canvasses relevant aspects of law.

I'm not sure…

Which of course would lead to strange situations if you fell off your own ladder while painting your own house, that is sue…

Currently family members supporting disabled family members get up to 28 days respite/carer support entitlement.

A day is 24 hours and the respite allowance allows for the disbursement of $76.00 for informal care ( family members, friends etc) and $85.50 for formal carers for that 24 hour period.

Oddly, it…

Nice.

I'm struck that ACC manages to successfully fund families in exactly the same situation, as do other countries. Our Ministry of Health refuses, but may pay for someone from outside the family to do the same job. That's the discrimination that the Tribunal has found to…

It would seem logical if the funding was attached to the person needing care.

Indeed! But this is Government we're dealing with.

I receive Individualised Funding, a monthly amount with which I employ support workers (I prefer the term PA because that's what they are, essentially). However, I am still…

Could I ask for some context? What allowances or other support do people in this situation currently get?

Currently family members supporting disabled family members get up to 28 days respite/carer support entitlement. The most common use of this is for some sort of (pseudo)institutional care.

The other aspect to all this is that (to recap) the Crown’s argument is that “the decision could open the floodgates to potentially thousands of claims for ACC short-term injuries where people leave hospital but still need care and a family member is…

A business-like care giver would then logically not care for own child and only spend their time caring for other people's children, allowing other care givers to care for their own child.

I'm no expert, but I doubt that the government starts paying full time for caregiving just because you…

*but with caring instead of murder, obviously.

A business-like care giver would then logically not care for own child and only spend their time…

But…

I believe this is the first time this has happened with the HRRT. But:

After Taito, Parliament passed a law in an attempt to prohibit criminal appellants wrongly denied appeals a second chance at having an appeal.

After Taunoa, Parliament passed a law to try to prevent prisoners…

I'm trying to compose my thought about this issue but every time I put something down, it just turns into a long rambling paean to family carers without much in the way of insightful analysis. Ever since I read of the government's decision to appeal I've been…

it takes its argument as far as possible.

Should the Govt lose the appeals, would we reasonably expect a change of policy in line with the HRRT decision, Graeme?

1. The Government does not take the HRRT seriously.
2. The Government likes to claim that it is at the forefront in human rights the world over. It can't credibly do that if there are findings that its laws or policies are discriminatory or otherwise breach human rights.…

Great post Philip. I just read through your trust page also. Excellent work. Keep it up.