Left-wing feminists are illogical

You have to laugh over the incongruity and inconsistencies of left-wing feminists.

Here is a diehard example, ex-Alliance MP, Liz Gordon, now "Annoyed campaigner for more women MPs" demanding more women in the ranks of National.

John Key was all over the radio this morning saying that he wanted more women MPs. He could not have wanted them enough, in my view. It has always appeared to me that what John wants, John gets. His wanting is therefore a cop-out – he should have demanded more women on the National list.

But surely a National politician is a National politician period. Why is a National woman preferable to a National man? When you hate the right, why go to bat for any of them?

Liz Gordon won't be shedding any tears over the fact that I am not standing. If she was a logical person she should be.

CPAG: back in court right on cue

In 2008 the Child Poverty Action Group took a case to the Human Rights Tribunal. They want the In Work Tax Credit paid to parents who are Not In Work. The Tribunal found against them.

Now they have taken that decision to the High Court. Anyone got any idea who would be funding that? Excuse my ignorance about legalistic matters but could the group be receiving legal aid to appeal?

The Crown is also appealing the Tribunal's finding so no question who is funding that. Is the taxpayer funding both parties to slug this thing out?

I have noted in the past that politically this case has an added dimension. National obviously support the right of the government to design a benefit system that encourages and incentivises people into work. In the past however the Maori Party has backed the CPAG. With 40 percent of Maori females aged 20-30 on a benefit (mainly the DPB) an extra $60 per child would represent a large increase in Maori income generally. At the same time it would intensify the problem of dependence.

And it is surely more than coincidence that both of the cases occurred near to elections. The Greens back the CPAG but will Labour be forced to take a new position? That'll be fascinating as the In Work Tax Credit was their 'baby' so to speak.

Case begins today.

Duplicate figures puzzling

Back in March 2009, under the OIA, MSD supplied the following information:

On a sickness or invalids benefit with a primary incapacity of substance abuse, at end December 2008:

Sickness 4,190
Invalid 1,648

I recently asked the same question to track any trend and received the following table:




Two and a half years later I find it remarkable that the total for those on the invalid's benefit is exactly the same and for those on the sickness benefit only 17 more. (No, MSD didn't just send me the same table twice).

Multiple factors would lead to an expectation of increased numbers. More work-place drug testing, more unemployment, apparently greater alcohol abuse among young people are three. I know there are at least two GPs who read this blog who might like to comment.

One would almost suspect a quota.

The word 'poverty'

At 57:46 a Samoan 35 year-old female called Kathryn talks to Danny Watson about the word 'poverty'. What it means to her living in Mangere Central; what it means to her mates and why the rest of us should stop using it.

Have a listen. You won't regret it.

"Rescue me"

From the Centre for Independent Studies, Australia:

Rescue me

Where once it was a mark of pride to take care of oneself in difficult situations, there is now an expectation that the government should save us, salve us, and secure us in all areas of our lives.

For example, travelers and expats are increasingly expecting the government to rescue them from volatile foreign hotspots.

A further example of our coddled citizenry comes from a couple who, according to Richardson, queried whether they could claim frequent flyer points from a government-arranged emergency flight out of Egypt during the recent upheavals – where the taxpayer was footing the bill.

Government is a mechanism to ensure a degree of order, national security, and representation in our lives. It is not a substitute parent whose role is to fund, soothe and cater to the demands of overindulged and heedless children, although with pandering to the polls and policy-on-the-run, you could be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

A recent commercial on television showed a fit, young man offering his dole cheque to win tickets to a rugby competition. What was most striking about this ad – its tongue-in-cheek nature notwithstanding – was the assumption that it’s normal for a healthy and able-bodied man to be on welfare.

Such attitudes are becoming commonplace in today’s dysfunctional welfare society, but this is certainly not desirable. Welfare statism effectively reduces elements of its citizenry to an enfeebled and dependent state, unable or unwilling to take responsibility for their own lives, actions and decisions. And it infuses the culture with a widespread belief that it’s up to the government to fix and manage just about everything, including help in claiming air miles.

The final word goes to acting Foreign Minister, Craig Emerson, who said recently: ‘There are limits to what the Australian government can do in a consular crisis.’ There are indeed limits to what the Australian government, or any government for that matter, can do – and should do – in our lives. Period.

Meegan Cornforth is Events Manager at the Centre for Independent Studies.

Too much irony ceases to be amusing

Every Child Counts, the left-wing conglomerate - blame-everybody-but-the-parents-for-child-poverty group - commissioned a report from Infometrics (yes, Gareth Morgan's outfit - now also part of the poverty industry). It was released mid-August but gained no traction. Initially I thought, on reading a piece in the NZ Herald this morning titled, Brown poverty a 'time bomb', they are having a second push by bringing race into it. Guaranteed to spark.

But then the Herald says the report is released "this morning". Not short of a bob or two are they? Ironically the 'poverty' industry appears quite rich.

Anyway, one of the Every Child Counts advocates, Hone Kaa, is lining up behind the coroner who wants all children monitored. But isn't the problem 'brown', to use his word?

"I really don't care for adults who say 'that's prying too much into my personal business'. As far as I'm concerned I want to save a child," Dr Kaa said.

The report argues that new ways of measuring well-being need to be developed which take into account Polynesian world views.

That is also rich in irony. Remember this quote from an earlier post:

.... the Status of Children Act 1969, [which] ended discrimination between children born within and outside registered marriage and removed the term "illegitimate" from the statute books. This legislation reflected a desire to reduce some of the stigma associated with ex-nuptial birth that New Zealand inherited from English family law and brought the judicial system into line with the much more liberal concepts of Māori (Cameron 1967, 1969, Quin and O'Neill 1984).

The liberal concepts of Maori. Polynesian world views.

They worked in past context perhaps. Within a large whanau or hapu. Children being raised by elders.

But they don't work within the modern NZ welfare state. Still the problem is misdiagnosed.

Labour's very old new policy

Kiwiblog has a post about Labour's old 'new' youth unemployment policy.

It details the recycling of the old policy at least four times.

But why stop at 2000?

Below is their 1980 policy as it appeared in the Evening Post, Thursday October 30, 1980.

Let's check the similarities.

2011 - Labour today announced its youth skills and employment package which gives all teenagers the opportunity to be earning or learning within three years.

1980 - Mr Rowling said a fourth Labour Government would go into office after the 1981 election with a total commitment to full employment as its priority.

2011 - “This is a ticking time-bomb and has to be fixed. These kids are our future but at the moment they are being left on the scrapheap. If we don’t do something now, we will all pay a far higher price. The New Zealand Institute estimates the cost of disengaged youth is $900 million a year.

1980 - "Experience shows that if young people are left out of work in the early period of their lives they never adapt to the work situation. The economic and social costs for a country of 3,000,000 people are devastating."

2011 - Converting dole payments into a $8700 subsidy to fund 9000 additional apprenticeship places


1980 - Abolition of the dole...and a vigorous apprenticeship drive....private employers hiring additional young people would qualify for a subsidy...

Somehow I don't think today's announcements are a game changer for Labour. They weren't in 1980 either.