Class act, National – taking money of widows?!

.

.

Bennett sez that welfare has,

“…become a bit of a trap for quite a few people…

… That sounds to me like it’s trapping them there and not giving them the kind of opportunities that they need, so changing those will make a big difference for them.”

I would have thought that it’s a lack of jobs “trapping” people in welfare?!

Not enough jobs = people on welfare.

Seems simple enough to me. Even Bennett admitted this, on TVNZ’s Q+A,

 “ No. There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do. ” – Paula Bennett, 29 April 2012

See: Q+A:  Paula Bennett interview

And just five  months earlier, Key had stated,

“We agree with you, it’s the government’s responsibility to do everything within it’s powers to try to get people jobs.” -John Key, 17 November 2011

See: Key and Goff Q and A Creating jobs

So where are the jobs?

Key and Bennett make big noises about jobseekers’ and other beneficiaries having obligations to find work. Where is the obligation of National to create an economy that  would produce these new  jobs?

Thus far, not only has National failed to create the 170,000 new jobs they promised last November – but unemployment is on the rise.

And National’s respomnse is to threaten the unemployed with benefit cuts and force compulsion onto solo-mothers to undertake so-called  “social obligations”?

It’s gotten to the point where this shabby government and it’s incompetant ministers have taken to robbing widows, for chrissakes,

“Apart from penalties, the only groups that will face an actual benefit cut are widows and women alone with no dependent children. The widows’ benefit, now $213.49 a week, will disappear next July and widows without dependent children will go on to Jobseeker Support at $204.96, a cut of $8.53 a week.”

$8.53 less: that’s a loaf of bread; a bottle of milk; and a tub of butter, less to put on the table. From women who’ve gone through the tragedy of losing their partners and husbands.

That’s how low National and this country  has gone; taking food of the tables of widows.

Christ, New Zealand, how f*****g proud are you to elect people like these cockroaches to Parliament?

Meanwhile, that taxpayer-bloated, minister –  charged  with  “protecting” the most vulnerable people in our society and who have suffered the most from the fallout of the Global Financial Crisis –  enjoys a highly paid “job” with perks that the rest of us could only dream about.

A bit of background into Paula Bennett’s life before she came to Parliament…

• Paula Bennet was a solo-mother, at age 17
• Just two years later, she got a Housing Corporation loan to buy a $56,000 house in Taupo.
• All of this while on the domestic purposes benefit.
• Paula Bennet was a recipient of the Training Incentive Allowance (a WINZ special allowance)
• Paula Bennet obtained her degree at Massey University, through the TIA, at taxpayers’ expense (which she has since canned for other solo-parents
• She tried a part-time job whilst at at Uni, but gave it up, citing it was “too much for her” to study and be a solo-mum at the same time.

Source

Source

So that’s the sort of parasitic creature we now have, sitting in a well-padded ministerial chair, on her equally well-padded backside.

All at taxpayers’ expense.

The same could be said of  John Key;  speculator; millionaire; and now ‘esteemed’ Prime Minister.

The same John Key who,

• as a child, benefitted from living in a cheap, state owned house, at taxpayers’ expense,
• had a widowed mum who received  a wideowers benefit (now cut) and Family Benefit ( now gone)
• aas a young man, benefitted from a free University education, at taxpayers’ expense (pre-student fees and loans)

These two well-paid politicians have enjoyed every assistance and benefit imaginable from our earlier social support mechanisms.

Now they have the utter hypocrisy to attack others receiving the same social support systems and welfare that they benefitted from?

And worse still – these two parasites have not even bothered to fulfill their end of the “contract” that they entered with the country and unemployed!

Paula Bennett is muck-raking when she says,

“It’s growing all the time … so if we can get them in, if we can give them the kind of help that they need, then I think that will make a big difference.”

See: Reforms to help beneficiaries out of ‘trap’

Rubbish.

The only “help” that welfare beneficiaries need are jobs. Bennett makes no reference to a lack of jobs and growing unemployment, because she is studiously avoiding her responsibilities and attempting to shift blame onto the victims of National’s ineptitude.

Cast our memories back to November, last year;

.

.

.

National committed itself, and pledged to voters, a programme of job creation. They were elected on the basis of a “bright new future” of 170,000 new jobs.

Instead we’ve had growing redundancies and rising unemployment.

Meanwhile, the unemployed are queuing up for any vancancies that  do appear on the jobs market,

.

Jobseekers flood a new Hamilton call centre

.

“A “high volume” of people applied for jobs advertised with 1st Call, with at least 100 people applying for each administrative role.” – Source

.

10 applicants for every one shelf-stocking job

.

“The jobs are being welcomed by Bay job-hunters – about 1000 people applied for just 90 jobs at a new McDonald’s in Mount Maunganui, which is due to open next month.” – Source

.

2700 applicants for 150 jobs

 

.

“The 20-year-old is among at least 51 people who have been given jobs at Rotorua’s new Wendy’s Old-Fashioned Hamburgers, which opens next month. After reading about the restaurant’s open recruitment day in The Daily Post, Mr Watson joined 349 people who queued to be interviewed by Wendy’s staff on Thursday last week.” – Source

.

Applicants queue for 20 jobs at new KFC store

.

1200 applicants for 200 supermarket jobs

.

“He went for a job at a petrol station and found out he was one of about 60 applying for one position. He was also one of 40 who applied for three jobs at a supermarket.” – Source

“Advertisements were placed one week ago for the 124 jobs in sales, administration, customer-service and trade specialist areas, and over 1500 applications have been received so far. Complex Manager Derek Powell says that people from all backgrounds have applied for the roles, and that the positions suit those with a background or interest in customer service, retail or the building trades.” – Source

.

It is not the unemployed, solo-mums (but never solo-dads), widows, etc, who are not meeting their obligations in seeking employment. The evidence shows that they  are queuing up at every opportunity.

It is National who has failed to meet their obligations in fulfilling their committment to create jobs.

Whilst National ministers are collecting generous  ministerial salaries, they are not fulfilling any of their responsibilities to ensure that jobs are being created.

It is not the unemployed who are “work shy” – it is John Key, Paula Bennett, Steven Joyce, et al – who are failing to  meet  promises of job-creation, and yet they have the brazeness to blame the unemployed.

And worse still is that a sizeable portion of the population are foolish enough to buy this repulsive attempt to blame the victims of a stagnating economy. New Zealanders might try taking an interest in what is happening in their own society, rather than obsessed aver mother-daughter porn on television.

This blogger is disgusted with the like of Key and Bennett who blame the unemployed for their own failings.

But more than that, I hold every New Zealander, who was idiot enough to vote for National last year, responsible. Theirs is the ultimate responsibility for giving us a government that is hopeless at governing.

Are you people happy now?

 

“Dopey is as dopey does”, according to Dear Leader

.

.

For a man who was raised in a state house; in a single-parent family; and who had all the benefits of a free tertiary education, John Key’s attitude towards those at the bottom of the socio-economic scale leaves a lot to be desired.

Let’s re-cap,

• John Key’s father died, leaving his mother a solo-mum, to raise children by herself,
• She would have received the DPB or widow’s benefit (and quite rightly so)
• She would most likely have been eligible for the Family Benefit, paid to families with children until Ruth Richardson scrapped it in her  1991 “Mother of all Budgets”
• John Key’s family  enjoyed a state house, with low-rent and security of tenure
• And lastly, John Key was given a free, tax-payer funded University education (no student fees or debt)

When the Children’s Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group (EAG) report was released, it’s recommendations included,

“ First, the group will call for a Warrant of Fitness for landlords. Given John Key has this weekend stressing the success of the Green-inspired home insulation scheme, but the disappointing uptake from landlords, it’s a timely bit of advice.

A WOF on rental homes would ensure poor kids don’t grow up in leaky, cold and unhealthy homes. Really, a safe, warm house should be a basic requirement if you’re going to charge rent. Who can argue with that?

Second, it’ll call for meals to be provided more widely in schools. Some, such as Deborah Morris-Travers from Every Child Counts says that’s a no-brainer. Children need food if they’re to learn and deal with the social demands of school. Some are less keen, however, arguing it takes the onus off parents and puts more pressure on teachers to feed as well as teach our children.

But another study shows this could just be the thin end of the school wedge. Every Child Counts’ Netherlands study this week talked about schools becoming a community hub, with not only meals but before and after school care, nurses, social workers and clubs.

It’s a bold prescription, but one that works overseas by helping working parents and keeping families connected to their schools.

Third, the EAG is expected to call for some form of long-term and universal state assistance for kids – maybe a Universal Child Benefit, or some money every week for every child born. Until 1991 we had such a thing – a Family Benefit. That went in the Bolger/Richardson years. “

See: Tim Watkin: It’s time to talk about child poverty again

These three options could put a serious dent into child poverty. A Universal Child Benefit – along the lines of  the old Family Benefit – could add an extra $150  and  extra food on the tables of low-income families.

John Key’s response? In Parliament, responding to a point made by Greens co-leader, Metiria Turei [error correction], he bellowed with great gusto,

“We are in an unequal society in New Zealand in her view because the rich are getting richer. And now she is on her feet telling me ‘give the rich families even more for their kids’. What a dopey idea that is.”

See: Key dismisses payment for all parents as ‘dopey’

What a mean-spirited, shallow-thinking man we have as a leader of our nation.

without a  doubt, John Key has a constituency of many other selfish, mean-spirited, short-sighted people in this country. There are a fair number of ill-educated and self-centered who think that the only solution to poverty is to do nothing, and let the poor struggle on. These people have no compassion.

That is the kind of  shallow-thinking that will eventually  doom a society to growing income-disparity; increasing gap between the Haves and Have Nots; and eventual social dislocation and violence.

Such people who think that the poor are poor because they deserve it are a far greater menace to the fabric of our social cohesion, than all the patched gang-members in our community.

For John Key to dismiss a proposed  Universal Child Benefit as “dopey” shows us only one thing; he has forgotten his roots. He has forgotten where he came from. He has forgotten not just the sacrifices of his family – but the strong community support that he benefitted from, and gave him the opportunity to make himself rich.

John Key is where he is because other taxpayers contributed to his housing, education, healthcare, and well-being.

He did not do it by himself.

This blogger does not begrudge Dear Leader’s bulging bank account of $50 million.

What I find reprehensible  is that he would deny other families the chance to access similar support to give their children a decent start in life.

Paula Bennett did the same with the Training Incentive Allowance. Bennett used the TIA to gain a free tertiary education for herself – and then cut the Allowance in 2009. Other solo-mothers can no longer use the same TIA to put themselves through University, and get of the DPB.

See: Bennett rejects ‘hypocrite’ claims

This blogger wonders at the like of John Key and Paula Bennett,  and  how they can deny others the same state-funded assistance that they themselves benefitted from.

What kind of human beings are these people?

How can they forget the assistance that they received when in need?

And what possible satisfaction  do they get when they deny state assistance to their fellow New Zealanders? Especially the same assistance that Key and Bennett personally benefitted from?

The greatest poverty that a society can endure is not monetary. It is a paucity of leadership. It is a lack of hope. And it is a disconnect in social compassion.

When we allow cruelty over compassion, then we are in deep trouble.

It is said that when facing a problem, the three challenges are,

1. Identify the problem,
2. Come up with solutions,
3. Have the Will to implement those solution.

We know the problem.

We have the solutions.

Our leaders are still looking for #3.

.

*

.

Previous related blogposts

Once upon a time there was a solo-mum

Hypocrisy – thy name be National

Hon. Paula Bennett, Minister of Hypocrisy

.

.

= fs =