Anne Tolley’s psycopathy – public for all to see

By   /   October 21, 2015  /   60 Comments

TDB recommends Voyager - Unlimited internet @home as fast as you can get

Tolley has exhibited questionable behaviour in the past. As previous Minister for Police, she made a spectacle of herself standing atop a crushed car that had been seized from some teenage boy-racer. She positively gloated at it’s destruction;

.

msd logo1

.

14 October: Surplus

On 14 October, seven years after National came to power, Finance Minister Bill English, announced that  his government had posted it’s first surplus; $414 million for the last financial year. English said,

“So that means the government has to take a different approach to reducing debt and maintaining surpluses than we have done in previous cycles.

So there won’t be any sense of the constraints coming off because I think in the past that has been the expectation after a period of constraint. It’s important that we continue to focus on improving our expenditure management so that we don’t slip into old habits and put that 10 kilos back on again.

The Budget 2015 one was pretty slim. We’ve had six months of growth that were softer than expected, that seems to be coming right now. But we’ve yet to see what impact that will have on the forecast.”

.

14 October: Death by Deficit

From a story broken by Radio NZ on 14 October;

Minister of Social Development Anne Tolley admitted that having to provide monthly medical certificates in the early stages of cancer was difficult, but said the government had to draw a line somewhere.

She said cancer patients could not expect special treatment, because then everyone would want it.

“Where you draw the line is always the issue,” she said.

“You start creating a whole lot of layers and there would be, I’m sure, other groups of people that would come forward and say, ‘we need special consideration too’.

According to the Radio NZ report by Alex Ashton – and released on the same day as Bill English announced his “surplus” – people suffering from cancer and about to undergo critical surgery, were being harassed by MSD/WINZ to undertake “job seeking obligations”;

Hundreds of cancer patients are being placed on the Jobseeker benefit while they are getting treatment.

One woman, who does not want to be identified, applied for a benefit when she was diagnosed with breast cancer.

She was put on Jobseeker Support, which replaced the sickness benefit after the 2013 welfare reforms.

She said she had to pay for a medical certificate every month to prove she could not work – even though her surgeon insisted she would be off for much longer.

“The letter from the hospital wasn’t sufficient. I then had to go back and get a doctor’s note to keep them happy, just to prove the fact that I was going in for surgery,” she said.

“Then I also had to, on the day of my surgery, get someone from the hospital to fax through that I had been operated on.”

Cancer Society chief executive Claire Austin said the woman’s story was common, and the system lacked common sense and sensitivity.

She said many cancer patients had never been on a benefit before, and deserved help while they were going through an extremely tough time.

“The situation really is ludicrous. We’ve got people who are already in work, who are unable to work because they are either sick and have to go through treatment, or have surgery.

“They have to then apply for a benefit, which is a benefit that requires them… to be available to work.”

The welfare “reforms” of 2013 were carried out by Paula Bennett – herself a former solo-mother and receiver of a free tertiary education paid by WINZ.

When the extraordinary situation of cancer patients forced to undergo work-testing and fulfill job-seeking obligations was put to the current Minister of Social Welfare, Anne Tolley, her response was less than sympathetic;

Minister of Social Development Anne Tolley acknowledged that having to provide monthly medical certificates in the early stages of cancer was difficult, but said the government had to draw a line somewhere.

She said if cancer patients were given special consideration, other people would want those considerations as well.

“Where you draw the line is always the issue,” she said.

“You start creating a whole lot of layers and there would be, I’m sure, other groups of people that would come forward and say, ‘we need special consideration too’.

Tolley  complained that if cancer patients were given special consideration, other people would want those considerations as well ?!

Well, yes. If “other people” were equally sick,  critically injured, or suffering some degenerative condition – they would need state support. After all, that is why we have a welfare system. That is why Ms Tolley is the Minister for Social Welfare, and is  on an annual salary of $272,581 (plus some very generous allowances, retirement  perks, and superannuation fund).

Tolley has exhibited questionable behaviour in the past. As previous Minister for Police, she made a spectacle of herself standing atop a crushed car that had been seized from some teenage boy-racer. She positively gloated at it’s destruction;

.

anne tolley - crushed car - boy racers - minister of police

.

Interviewed on TV3 News in June 2012, she even taunted boy-racers to carry on breaking the law by challenging them to “bring it on“, so their cars could also be confiscated and destroyed.

Thankfully, boy-racers apparently  had the good sense to ignore Tolley’s dangerous school-yard ‘dare’, leaving the Minister’s childish words hanging embarrassingly in the air – though not before an editorial in the NZ Herald voiced it’s own distaste at her actions;

“What, then, was the Police Minister, Anne Tolley, doing dancing on the bonnet of a crushed car at a Lower Hutt scrapyard this week? This was a crass stunt unbecoming of any minister of any government.

[…]

But worse than the undignified celebration of such a dubious landmark was the message being delivered by Ms Tolley. She was suggesting, in effect, that when on top, the boot should be put in as far as possible. That it was fine to wallow in the misfortune of others.”

Three years later, on 21 June this year, political reporter Corin Dann interviewed Social Development Minister, Anne Tolley for TVNZ’s Q+A. The interview was brilliant, in that we, the public, caught a further glimpse of a person who apparently has very little empathy or concern for those less fortunate than herself.

To re-cap from my previous blogpost;

Last year, two year old old Emma-Lita Bourne died last year from a brain haemorrhage. Emma-Lita had been suffering from a pneumonia-like illness in the final days of her short, misery-filled, life, leading up to her death.

In a coronial  inquest, Coroner Brandt Shortland concluded;

“I am of the view the condition of the house at the time being cold and damp during the winter months was a contributing factor to her health status.”

Corin Dann pointedly asked Tolley about Emma-Lita’s  death;

@ 6.35 –

“Some would argue with the recent case, for example, with Emma-Lita Bourne who died in the state house, [a] damp house, why not just give those families more money to pay their power bill, rather than give the organisations money to come in and work and all the rest of it?”

Tolley responded;

@ 6.54 –

“And, and, when you look at something like Whanua Ora, they are doing some of that. See, see, what we’ve got with the focus on individual programmes and agencies working in silos, families don’t work like that. They’re very complex issues so if I don’t know the details of that particular family…”

A member of the public listening to Tolley’s  comments where she admitted to “[not knowing] the details of that particular family” might have forgiven the Minister for an unfortunate turn-of-phrase  that simply came across as someone who didn’t care.

However, when placed alongside her  recent comment on 14 October, on Radio NZ’s report;

“Where you draw the line is always the issue. You start creating a whole lot of layers and there would be, I’m sure, other groups of people that would come forward and say, ‘we need special consideration too’.

–  and Tolley’s  apparent lack of interest in children dying in cold, damp State houses, coupled with an obvious  delight in crushing cars – confirms an impression of a somewhat indifferent, cold, and unpleasant personality.

But is that the sum-total of why Tolley refuses to understand the needs of families living in damp houses, or cancer-sufferers being forced to jump  through bureaucratic hoops for no discernible good reason?

14 October: Where the money went

Last year, the outlook for National to meet it’s self-imposed goal of a surplus for the 2014/15 financial year seemed bleak.  This was a problem for National, as Radio NZ’s Brent Edwards explained with simple clarity  on 21 November 2014;

“From National’s perspective, it has been a key political argument to perpetuate the narrative that only it can be fiscally responsible while in contrast Labour is irresponsible with taxpayers’ money.  Setting a surplus target of 2014-15 has been an important part of that political strategy.”

The Opposition were prepared to make the most of National’s impending failure to meet it’s own goal of generating a surplus.

It’s reputation, according to public perception, of being the Party of Responsible Fiscal Management would be badly damaged if it failed to deliver on it’s promise of a 2014/15 surplus.

English’s task was made harder by the deteriorating state of the economy, as Brent Edwards reported. English lamented;

“This combination of lower commodity prices and low inflation means that the nominal or dollar value of New Zealand’s economic output will not grow as fast as previously expected. This will affect farm and company incomes and we expect this to flow into the Government’s books through lower revenue.”

If National could not balance it’s books by tax-revenue, it had only one other option available to it – reduce spending.

And cut spending the government did – by a whopping $1.081 billion  in ten Vote areas. According to Treasury, Total Crown Expenses cuts comprised of;

  • Government Superannuation Fund: cut by  $2 million
  • Health: cut by $52 million
  • Education: cut by $235 million
  • Core government services: cut by $42 million
  • Law and order: cut by $96 million
  • Transport and communications: cut by $304 million
  • Primary services: $108 million
  • Housing and community development: cut by $97 million
  • “Other”: cut by $140 million
  • Forecast new operating spending: cut by $7 million

Note that many of the areas cut were those relating to health, education, justice, and housing/community development – four of the most critical areas of any government’s spending.

No wonder so many hospitals are in the ‘red’ with their budgets.

No wonder so many schools cannot afford maintenance on their delapidated buildings.

The cut to Law and Order did not just affect prisons, courts, and policing. As Radio NZ recently discovered, it also impacted on legal aid for domestic violence victims;

.

Legal aid rules not failing domestic violence victims says minister

.

The Radio NZ report explains;

The Ministry of Justice took over legal aid in 2011, and introduced a series of budget cuts aimed at saving $250 million.

[Criminal Bar Association president Tony] Bouchier said things had deteriorated since then, and more funding was the answer.

“The whole idea of legal aid is to give people the opportunity of access to justice which is an absolute basic right in this country,” he said.

“It comes down to whether the government is going to properly fund the legal aid system; that’s where we’re at at the moment.

“The legal aid system is not being fully provided for and it’s causing all sorts of issues of justice in our court system – it’s legal aid on a shoestring budget.”

Remember Anne Tolley’s rebuke to cancer sufferers;

“Where you draw the line is always the issue. You start creating a whole lot of layers and there would be, I’m sure, other groups of people that would come forward and say, ‘we need special consideration too’.”

Fair-minded people would not  expect that women (and others) needing protection under the law, from violent partners,  should be denied access to a lawyer, and expect legal aid if they required it. Especially if their safety, and that of their children, depended on it.

But not according to this government.

According to this government, cancer sufferers and victims of domestic violence should not expect ” special consideration “.

14 October: Spending on ‘important stuff’

“I suppose that’s possible, we put the allowance in there three years ago…[and] we’ve always got the capacity to move that around.”

The Herald, though, was less than impressed at loose talk of tax cuts, suggesting instead that National address the ballooning $60-plus billion debt (see Appendix1) racked up by National;

The surplus is worth celebrating, even if it does not last long. But it would be wrong to give it away in tax cuts, even if it proves to be sustainable.

It’s editorial headline, “Use surplus for benefit of everyone” was positively socialist.

.

  • National Ministers had an early Christmas when they gifted themselves 34 new BMWs. The last batch – bought in 2011 – are to be replaced only after about three years’ use.Cost? Unknown. According to National, the price is “commercially sensitive”. (Code for *politically embarrassing*.)

.

  • National loves to invest. Cycleways. Aluminium smelters. ‘Hobbit‘ movies. Even farms in the middle of the Saudi Arabian desert. Cost to taxpayer: $11.5 million

.

.

.

  • Subsidies and special tax concessions to Warner Bros for ‘The Hobbit‘, and to other movie companies? Cost – ongoing.

.

Anne Tolley asked; “Where you draw the line is always the issue”.

The above list might be a good start.

National’s “achievement” of a $414 million surplus was paid for by ordinary New Zealanders; sick people suffering from cancer; State house tenants with sick and dying children; women bashed by their partners. Children living in poverty. The unemployed and solo-parents (mostly women) pushed off welfare for most trivial reasons. All have also paid dearly for this government’s excesses.

Some who are “paying dearly for this government’s excesses” may not have expected to be victimised.  Cancer Society chief executive, Claire Austin, suggested that up to 800 cancer sufferers could be on a jobseeker’s benefit, without  an official WINZ work exemption excusing them from job seminars, interviews, and other bureaucratic hurdles. She stated;

[There were] probably just as many who gave up because it’s just too distressing, too complex, there’s a lack of sensitivity in terms of the process”.

One wonders how many of those estimated 800 cancer sufferers who are on the jobseekers benefit, and are being chased by WINZ  to fulfill work-ready obligations, also voted National?

If one quarter of the population are represented by the 1,131,501 voters who voted for National last year, then it would be fair to assume that a similar ratio of one quarter (200) of those 800 cancer sufferers voted National.

Is this what they expected from their charismatic Prime Minister, that nice, friendly, easy-going Mr Key?

Which sector of New Zealand society will be next to feel the cold, dead hand of this penny-pinching government? A government that refuses to invest in  New Zealanders who need assistance the most – but has no hesitation throwing money at luxury limousines; multi-million dollar residences; subsidies to corporations; and a farm in the middle of nowhere in a Saudi desert.

Who will be next?

More than ever, I am reminded of this;

.

FIRST-THEY-CAME

.

Appendix1

According to Treasury, as at 30 June 2015, net government debt currently stands at NZ$60.631 billion. That equates to 25.2% of GDP.

In 2008, net debt stood at around NZ$10 billion, as the Treasury chart below shows;

.

net debt 2005 - 2015

.

Current net debt is six times what it was, seven years ago.

.

.

.

References

Interest.co.nz: Treasury reports OBEGAL surplus of NZ$414 million in year to June 30, 2015

Radio NZ: Jobseeker benefit for cancer patients ‘ludicrous’

Radio NZ: Welfare should be a safety net not a trap – Bennett

Legislation.govt.nz: Parliamentary Salaries Determination 2015

TV3 News: Car crushing ‘discredits law’ – expert

NZ Herald: Editorial: Car crushing an undignified stunt

TVNZ Q+A:  Revolutionary changes in store for social services (14:11)

Radio NZ: Power Play with Brent Edwards

NZ Herald: No surplus this year – Treasury

NZ Treasury: Analysis of Expenses by Functional Classification for the year ended 30 June 2015

Radio NZ: Legal aid rules not failing domestic violence victims says minister

Fairfax media: Tax cuts ‘possible’ after first surplus for NZ government

NZ Herald: Editorial – Use surplus for benefit of everyone

Fairfax media: Crown looks to trade in its luxury limo fleet

NZ Herald: Govt backtracks on limo statements

NZ Herald: Complaints laid against Murray McCully over Saudi farm deal

Fairfax media: NZ government shells out $11m on New York apartment for UN representative

Fairfax media: NZ diplomat involved in decision to buy $6.2m luxury Hawaiian mansion

Otago Daily Times: Smelter gets Meridian, Govt lifeline

Rio Tinto.com: Rio Tinto announces a 10 per cent increase in underlying earnings to $10.2 billion and 15 per cent increase in full year dividend

Fairfax media: Poverty-stricken kids resort to scavenging

Fairfax media: Cancer Society attacks ‘ludicrous’ benefit requirements for cancer patients

Wikipedia: 2014 General Election

Additional

NZ Treasury: Financial Statements of the Government of New Zealand for the Year Ended 30 June 2015

NZ Treasury: Year End Financial Statements – 14 October 2015

Previous related blogposts

Hon. Paula Bennett, Minister of Hypocrisy

The law as a plaything

A fitting response to National MP’s recent personal attacks on Metiria Turei

On ‘The Nation’ – Anne Tolley Revealed

“I don’t know the details of that particular family” – Social Development Minister Anne Tolley

.

.

.

bill english - cuts - budget

.

.

= fs =

***
Want to support this work? Donate today
***
Follow us on Twitter & Facebook
***

60 Comments

  1. Kay says:

    Another terrific article Frank.

    It took me a while to work it out, but I believe that right wing governments can’t function without psychopaths at the helm. In order to inflict so much pain and suffering on so many people so callously requires the inability to feel empathy, the primary characteristic of a psychopath. That’s why they make ideal Ministers, especially in social portfolios. Any and all criticism means nothing to them. I suppose we should be greatful we’re not having to suffer Ian Duncan-Smith (yet) although the trend is starting to show here.

    So we can’t change the psychopaths, they’re completely hard-wired, but why can’t we change the many non-psychopaths that continue to vote for them??

    • Blake says:

      Because they have been brain washed by the same media and crooked politicians. Because they believe the dribble and BS coming out of Anne Tolley’s and Donkey’s mouth. Does anyone else completely mis – trust her and what she affirms?
      ===>> She is another who needs to be forced out to pasture.

      I am so disappointed that someone of her intense bias and stupidity is part of governing our country.

  2. Gosman says:

    Ummm… where are the cuts in the expenditure figures you mention? The link you provided seems to suggest increase in expenditure in most of the areas you have listed from 2014 to 2015.

    • wild katipo says:

      Kids are dying , Gosman… adults are suffering life threatening disease whilst being bullied by a welfare organisation that WE pay the taxes and wages for…

      If I was you …Id take a keen eye to what really stands behind these people who you are so proud of to call your ideal leaders and ideologists…

      Dark things that have no concern whatsoever about how many children die or how many adults suffer as long as they can continue to rule autocratically no matter what party is in power.

      Dark things that don’t particularly like you either mate.

    • Sam Sam says:

      Your answer is in the budget documents titled budget “2014-2015.” Emphases on “2014-2015.”

      • Indeed, Sam. It appears that the reference links I provide for people like Gosman are too difficult to navigate.

        Next time I will use pictures drawn with bright crayons.

        • Sam Sam says:

          I find G rated comments difficult to post because it requires a certain level of finger dexterity that allows users to click on links. But I digress.

          Iv been reading your blogs for some months now. You post tight efficient work.

          It’s funny to note how people think you could fit more info into 2000 word posts.

          Mauri ora.

    • Winnie says:

      Gosman, you cold-blooded right-winger. Just accept Frank’s evidence, then report back to the ones that pay you, that Anne Tolley should be promoted to lead the National Party ahead of Judith Collins.

      Collins has a second job promoting cars anyway, so will be too busy to be PM when JK retires.

      Tolley has everything it takes to take over from JK. That endearing sense of care for the common man and woman that JK is so famous for.

      Anne Tolley for PM – sorted.

    • bert says:

      The figures would be hard to find as Key appears to illegally delete his text messages.

  3. GettingOn says:

    Good post. Depressing read. Do you have to have no empathy to get into power these day?

    • Gettingon – it would appear to be so. Furthermore, perhaps there is a problem with our welfare/housing system if it produces the likes of Key and Bennett, who have our welfare system to thank for their very survival.

      The State (ie, we, as a community) gave them money and a roof to put over their heads. What we forgot to give them was an expectation to Pay It Forward.

  4. J S Bark J S Bark says:

    Phew, Frank! That’s quite a chunk of research there.

    Yes I’m hoping that as the cuts start biting the middle classes more, those who voted for this Slater-Nazi government will also come under the chopping block. That is where to put the wedge.

    The morning I heard that Morning Report item I thought to myself “Hooray! Now the middle classes are getting hit and boy do they sound outraged! Now we might see some action against this government.”

    But I’m not sure that I did see any action. Certainly not of the political type.

    So who is going to make all the noise about this and present themselves as a better alternative government?

    Aye, there’s the rub…

    • Thanks, JS. Yes, quite a “chunk” of information.

      Your thoughts about the middle classes getting hit by this rotting carcass of a government crossed my mind as well. But I fear we’re not yet at the 1998/99 stage where health cuts were really impacting on everyone – especially the Voting (Middle) Class. Not yet, anyway.

      It does get depressing and every so often one has to step away from the computer; go outside; smell the air; stare at the sky; and thank a certain asteroid/comet there are no dinosaurs around to devour me. (Yeah, it’s been one of those weeks.)

      Then it’s a matter of getting back to it and address the next f**k-up, courtesy of our esteemed Dear Leader…

      • Lara says:

        Thank you Frank for your continued perseverance.

        Your efforts are appreciated very much by a large chunk of your country.

        You have much support. Keep on.

        • Gosman says:

          Not that large given hard left wing parties only got a few percentage of the electorate last election.

          • Sam Sam says:

            Goose. Are you on Drugs? What’s hard left? PCP? GHB? You youngeople are so full of it

          • Blake says:

            We hope that the brain dead who voted pro Jonkey Donkey last election have woken up a bit to the realities and the truths behind this out of touch; lying criminal of a PM.

            Gosman – your ongoing defense of him and his out of touch govt. is not only laughable but shows a deep level of sheer ignorance.

  5. J S Bark J S Bark says:

    Oh I like your MSD logo BTW.

    Very apropos… 🙂

  6. Sam Sam says:

    I am going to bookmark this page for future use, I have seen way to many people use the Budget as a case against Democratic change. This pretty much rebuts any claim of the sort and smashes it into the ground. Which will pretty much look like the following.

    Anonymous: why should I have to pay for some one on welfare

    Sam: you don’t pay for nothing. From this Frank Macskyasy summarises it pretty well link:https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/10/21/anne-tolleys-psycopathy-public-for-all-to-see/

    “National’s “achievement” of a $414 million surplus was paid for by ordinary New Zealanders; sick people suffering from cancer.”

    Anonymous: socialism!

  7. Gosman says:

    I see what you’ve done here now. You have taken the forecast spend for 2015 and subtracted the actual spend for 2015 and made the rather large assumption that the difference is a result of cuts. What you should do is look at actuals from 2014 and compare them to actuals in 2015. That will give you a much better view of how spending is trending. It isn’t downwards by the way.

    • This is now the second or third time you’ve attempted to re-define a problem by changing the parameters. No, Gosman, deal with what I uncovered.

      I will not compare 2014 to 2015. Nor will I compare 2013 to 2014. Nor 1963 to 1964. Nor fucking 1066 to 1067 (AD).

      If you have no answer to the fact that ten Votes were cut by $1.081 billion, then I suggest to you that, in itself, is revealing.

      • Gosman says:

        Votes weren’t cut. You are comparing budgeted spend with actual spend. They are always going to be different for any number of reasons. Cuts get made at the budgeted level. Government Ministers will tell their departments that they now have X number of dollars less to spend so please cut back. It is usually not in the interest of departments to cut back on money they have already been pre-allocated.

        • You are comparing budgeted spend with actual spend.

          Indeed. And the under-spending equate to cuts, as I pointed out;

          And cut spending the government did – by a whopping $1.081 billion in ten Vote areas. According to Treasury, Total Crown Expenses cuts comprised of;

          Government Superannuation Fund: cut by $2 million
          Health: cut by $52 million
          Education: cut by $235 million
          Core government services: cut by $42 million
          Law and order: cut by $96 million
          Transport and communications: cut by $304 million
          Primary services: $108 million
          Housing and community development: cut by $97 million
          “Other”: cut by $140 million
          Forecast new operating spending: cut by $7 million

          One or two Ministeries underspending, I can understand.

          But ten?!

          That is no coincidence, Gosman. As you pointed out, ” It is usually not in the interest of departments to cut back on money they have already been pre-allocated.”

          • Sam Sam says:

            See. This is what I’m talking about.

            The / a government talks a sweet game before the election.

            Talks sweet nothings about the budgeting and fiscal skills.

            Then afterwards it turns out they are full of it with zero answers

          • Gosman says:

            Government departments are responsible for spending money that has been allocated to them as part of the budget process. If there was a deliberate attempt to spend less than that allocated then it would be quite easy to get the details of this. There will be Ministerial directives and orders from the Departments Chief Executives which will instruct the various areas to spend less. Do you have this information? A decent investigative journalist would have.

            • Do you have this information? A decent investigative journalist would have.

              Quite right, Gosman.

              Which is why I put in OIA requests on many issues. I’m still waiting for responses from the PM’s office, Amy Adams, Corrections, and Bill English. They are requests over a month old. And when I do get requests answered, the responses are vague and unhelpful.

              I believe the problem of Ministers not upholding the Official Information Act has been well covered in the last few months and I trust you’re aware of the investigation being carries out by the Ombudsman’s Office?

              Interesting that you blame journalists (or bloggers like me) for lacking information when it is deliberately withheld from the public/media/bloggers.

              As for your suggestion that “there will be Ministerial directives and orders from the Departments Chief Executives which will instruct the various areas to spend less” – not if the Directive was made verbally and informally. There would be no record of this. (Good try though.)

              In fact, our esteemed dear Leader has conducted dealings with Sky City and Mediaworks using such informal methods (which, if you follow my blogposts, you’d be aware of those two instances).

              So, facts are scanty; OIA requests are all but pointless; and government can work informally.

              Which means that when we find an instance of ten ministeries underspending by $1.081 billion when you yourself realise that “it is usually not in the interest of departments to cut back on money they have already been pre-allocated” – then that’s the best evidence we have of how English obtained his Budget surplus.

              It also explains why, as he himself has admitted, there probably won’t be any more surpluses.

              • Gosman says:

                I’m not sure you understand how the public service works. The public service in NZ is not beholden to do as instructed by Ministers simply on a whim. They should only carry out instructions that have official sanction. If they are not then they are guilty of incompetency or at worse corruption. Given that no Opposition parties are highlighting problems in the public service either of these two options seems a remote possibility.

                • Gosman, you are deflecting.

                  I have outlined how ten Ministeries (not “departments”) have cut their expenditure;

                  If National could not balance it’s books by tax-revenue, it had only one other option available to it – reduce spending.

                  And cut spending the government did – by a whopping $1.081 billion in ten Vote areas. According to Treasury, Total Crown Expenses cuts comprised of;

                  Government Superannuation Fund: cut by $2 million
                  Health: cut by $52 million
                  Education: cut by $235 million
                  Core government services: cut by $42 million
                  Law and order: cut by $96 million
                  Transport and communications: cut by $304 million
                  Primary services: $108 million
                  Housing and community development: cut by $97 million
                  “Other”: cut by $140 million
                  Forecast new operating spending: cut by $7 million

                  As you pointed out (or was that an inadvertant slip on your part);

                  ” It is usually not in the interest of departments to cut back on money they have already been pre-allocated.”

                  Feel free to address that issue and not drift away on a tanjeant into the public service (which has become more highly politicised over the last seven years). Reframing the issue because you can’t address the actual point of my blogpost indicates you have no answers to what I have raised.

                  By the way, I responded to your points about ” Do you have this information? A decent investigative journalist would have”. You have pointedly ignored the reply I gave you. If you’re going to make comments and then ignore the response, it indicates to me you’re here to play games and score points, and not much more.

                  As for no your reference about Opposition parties – I refer you to Grant Robertson’s recent comment in Parliament;

                  Fast forward to a National Government, and we have 3 percent growth, a $441 million surplus—and we will come back to how that has been created—and unemployment nudging up against 6 percent. The question the National Government has to answer is: who is the economy for in this situation? Who is benefiting from this so-called surplus? Is it the 305,000 New Zealand children growing up in poverty? Should they be thrilled today that Bill English has manufactured a surplus by bodgying around with the figures? Is it the 148,000 New Zealanders who are unemployed today? Should they be pleased that Bill English managed to cut a bit of spending here, to not pay out on the earthquake there, and to overcharge ACC by $350 million? Should they be happy about that? It seems to me that what we heard today from the National Party is that the political target of a surplus was more important than what we should as a country be trying to achieve with the economy. Time after time with this National Government it has been about what it thinks it can get away with—what it thinks it can hide from the New Zealand public instead of what it can actually do to use the economy to improve people’s lives, to reduce inequality, and to give opportunities to children who need special education support.

                  There is an underspend in these accounts that have been released today of $235 million in education. Part of that is the Ministry of Education’s failed experiment to try to force “super-principals” on schools. Another part of it is special education funding that has not been spent, and there is not an electorate member in this House who has not had a visit from a parent whose child has been denied the special education support they need. That is what the Government celebrates today: $50 million – odd underspent in health, underspending in housing, and underspending in law and order. It is making up a surplus while $350 million is overcharged to New Zealand individuals and businesses for their ACC.

                  14 October
                  http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/51HansD_20151014_00000008/general-debate

            • By the way, thanks for reminding me to send emails to those Ministers asking what is the progress of my OIA requests. It’s nice to get a reminder, even if inadvertant.

    • Blake says:

      More mumbo gumbo fuzzy logic from the pro Jonkey donkey camp meant to mislead and sway while using bias to make a point.
      Who pays you Gossy and how much ? You are working overtime while influencing and swaying practically no one.

      THANKS — AGAIN — FRANK – WELL DONE ! ! !

  8. Gosman says:

    Dear ScarletMod. Are you able to assist in identifying potential issues with your website?

    [What issues, Gosman? – ScarletMod]

    • Winnie says:

      Yep Scarlet, you should provide Gosman some adult colouring in sections, because he obviously cannot read.

      It certainly is an issue and should be addressed for him asap, otherwise he might take his services to the Whaleoil Blog. He’s got a nice black n white whale to colour in.

      • Blake says:

        Poor Gossy – seems we have ruffled up some of his National political feathers. Clearly he is very likely a politician undercover and can only spew out the pro-Natz propaganda anonymously.
        As if the money they have allocated is appropriate and enough to get the jobs done and treat the people of NZ with COMPASSION and INTEGRITY. Two words non-existent in most political arenas.
        Give Gossy some fluorescent crayons next time, instead for his art so he can release some pent up frustration at us just not agreeing with him very much at all.
        More mumbo gumbo fuzzy logic from our Gossy.

        Maybe we should pay less attention to such a troll and focus away from setting someone straight who will always be a bit curvy.

    • Gosman says:

      If you send me an e-mail I can advise.

      [Gosman you have mail. -ScarletMod]

      • Sam Sam says:

        Advise what Goose? Your fees are too cheap

        • Blake says:

          Ha Ha funny – thanks for the lightness – I still think gozzy needs some better quality ( maybe fluorescent ) crayons to keep him busy and creative and happy in his delusions.
          Would love to know who is paying him.

  9. wild katipo says:

    This is what you get when you vote in reptilians…

    Meet your Lords and Masters…

    Embrace their deceit and lies.

    Indeed this….

    The welfare “reforms” of 2013 were carried out by Paula Bennett – herself a former solo-mother and receiver of a free tertiary education paid by WINZ.

    Who then went on to use her taxpayer funded tertiary qualifications to deny people JUST LIKE SHE WAS that same opportunity… watch the tongue flick in and out of her mouth….

    And the flicking , forked tongue of Bill English… known as the Double Dipper of Dipton who once stated :…

    ”We should be glad we have a LOW WAGE economy as this encourages FOREIGN INVESTMENT ” ….

    Watch him slither through tax cuts for the rich elite whilst the rest of us ‘consumer eaters’ get treated like cattle…and pay for their lifestyles through our taxes and vote them in as if under some sort of mass hypnotic spell…

    And the psychopathy of the woman who became the incompetent Minister for Police….those charged to safeguard US.

    You can almost feel the whip of its tail and sense the deadness in those vertical slit pupils we call its eyes as it crawls past….and delivers this almost insane response….

    “Where you draw the line is always the issue,” she said.
    “You start creating a whole lot of layers and there would be, I’m sure, other groups of people that would come forward and say, ‘we need special consideration too’.

    Many have observed something that happens when these people enter parliament…. that it is theorized that they are pulled aside by the deep state machine…and given quiet lessons in correct behavior…

    But it is hard to conceive just how quickly these types descend into sociopathy … that leads one to suspect something else is afoot…something unseen , something malevolent…

    There is no rational rhyme or reason for it… shot through with blatant deceit and hypocrisy as it is…

    Something very unpleasant seems to have taken over our parliament these latter decades…and despite the fact that they might seem like you and I…these people are certainly not like the majority of us with normal compassion , values and common sense… something else guides the neo liberal ideology and it certainly isn’t in your best interests.

  10. Joanna P says:

    The thing about the “national party” that gets me, is that they don’t seem to be a political entity as such. What they are, or rather, how they function in “government”, is as a board of directors hell bent on returning substantial dividends to their shareholders.

    These shareholders aren’t necessarily those who vote for them, but their political backers, the ones who put up the money. I can’t think of one action they have taken in government which does not meet this basic rule … “will this return dividends to our shareholders?”. Not one.

    And the lists above demonstrate this ‘axiom of national’. If it is not in the shareholders interest it simply not done. This is not government. It is unabated self interest. Thanks again Frank for your excellent work.

    • wild katipo says:

      Yes….you are quite right.

      This is not true governance. These types make decisions based on a corporate shareholders main concerns of a getting a maximum return from their investments.

      This is why we have seen progressively over the decades now the dismantling of the welfare state and traditional areas such as health , education , law , pay equity and wages etc…

      And like any corporation it is driven by the bottom line of maximum profit returns.

      This is not governance of a nation – it is profit extraction in exactly the same way as a corporation. Hence the total lack of social concern for the peoples suffering.

      You will not see any change in this as well. Nor can you bank on the Labour party either … as both are polluted by the neo liberal and that monetarist ideology…

      This is also why I always call Key a phony PM .

      A fraud if you will…

      He is no more a real Prime Minister than he is a hammerhand on a construction site.

      He is a stooge for the USA who’s job is almost complete now that he’s undemocratically rammed through the signing of the TTPA , committed us to Americas war , dismantled the last vestiges of the welfare state and degraded our national sovereignty to the point of being nothing more than just a token gesture.

      This was why he was selected for the job.

      • Blake says:

        =====>>> ” John Key is a corporation in disguise of a man. ”
        He is a puppet serving the masters above him just as Obama is.
        I agree with the above comments about the death of democracy and the takeover of our govt. in servitude of shareholders profits and Mega-corporate CEO criminals. Iceland have put these joker bankster gangsters in prison and WE CAN TOO.
        Where are the NZ solicitors and the NZ govt. parties with spines ?
        We people need to pressure and question authority every chance we get.

    • Gosman says:

      So how did extending free doctors visits to up to 13 year olds increase the dividend returns for shareholders?

      • Sam Sam says:

        The health system was not planed goose. It is largely born of accidents.

        A contraption of private insurance paid by employers, co-pays paid by employees and state programs guarantees paperwork consumes an estimated 40% of all healthcare expenditure.

        Why don’t you know this? You’ve got so much to say about the legalese of TPPA, but when it comes to the simple stuff you turn into a moron.

        • Gosman says:

          That largely avoided answering my question but thanks for making the effort.

          • Actually, Gosman, I think Sam answered your largely ridiculous question in the best possible way.

            And trust me, your question was asinine. Only you could frame free health-care for 13 year olds as an “increase the dividend returns for shareholders”.

            There is something chilling about the way you look at other human beings, Gosman.

            • Gosman says:

              Ummm… no. I asked how it could be framed in terms of “increase the dividend returns for shareholders”. That was the original claim from Joanna P. She stated that all actions of the current government are couched in those terms.

              [Gosman; you have mail. – ScarletMod]

              • Blake says:

                More mumbo gumbo fuzzy logic meant to confuse and sway away from the more important issues and facts. Get your crayons out Gozzy, you need a break.

      • Blake says:

        Fuzzy logic making absolutely no sense. Why not free GP visits for all ? Oh no, the shareholders of huge health insurance companies would not like those returns.

  11. Jack Ramaka says:

    National and ACT have basically Asset Stripped State Assets and passed the ownership over to their cronies in the Private Sector, it has been a No Brainer and a great source of wealth for these closely aligned parties.

    Most of these parties are generous donors to the National and ACT Party coffers.

  12. Gemma says:

    Frank, you are an incredibly talented investigative journalist. You run rings around supposed journalists in the mainstream media with your knowledge, research ability and eloquent, accessible writing style. Keep up the excellent work!

    • Gemma – thank you. That made my day for me!! 🙂

      • Gemma says:

        By the way Frank, it is evident that Gosman has far too much time on his / her hands and suffers from a personality flaw / disorder, whereby even in the face of irrefutable evidence, he / she will perversely and pedantically argue the opposite point of view, and will not accept facts.

        • Blake says:

          Well said – I agree !
          I think Gozzy is a Natz politician/lobbyist ( ? ) undercover and is deluded in thinking that many agree with his propaganda.
          Stinkin Thinkin — tries to hold on – sad – sad – sad.

  13. Jack Ramaka says:

    Unfortunately NZ does not have any Investigative Journalists in Main Stream Media.

  14. Jack Ramaka says:

    Wild Katipo is bang on the button with the comment that “the extraction of Profit for the key shareholders is the most important KPI for organisations aligned to the Government”, the 1% percenters are scrambling to squeeze the last little bit of profit out of the Public having already acquired most of the wealth ie 99% although the statistics may not be quite as high here in NZ. After all “Greed is Good” or a “Brighter Future” for all New Zealanders especially if you are in the upper income brackets?


 
Authorised by Martyn Bradbury, The Editor, TheDailyBlog,