Paula Bennett

neeandsam - I am not sure that this is being directed at you but I can fully understand why you would feel like it is and hence can understand your reaction above... but then you are in a different situation to the woman we are discussing in that you are getting on with your life and not moaning and going public with your plight in a "woe is me" situation. So yes your info should be private but in the situation with these woman they have chosen to make aspects of their lives public and therefore I personally believe that the public has the right to know the fully situation.

I can't understand why they shouldn't have to get a loan. much like everyone else has too - I want a journalist to ask them that question and see what their response to that it as haven't heard that question being asked. I think unfortunately with Paul Bennett realeasing the info the actually core problem is not being addressed, just the privacy issue when I would like to hear some responses on the core issue.

Peanut wrote: I can't understand why they shouldn't have to get a loan. much like everyone else has too - I want a journalist to ask them that question and see what their response to that it as haven't heard that question being asked. I think unfortunately with Paul Bennett realeasing the info the actually core problem is not being addressed, just the privacy issue when I would like to hear some responses on the core issue.

I agree with you Peanut, that's why I think it's a shame Paula Bennett released the info because now the issue has become "privacy" rather than the TIA.

I'm not sure why they can't get loans either - especially when one of the justifications for having student loans (vs free tertiary education) is that people will be able to pay them off because they will go into well-paying jobs. But as I said before, I'm not sure of the ins and outs of the TIA and whether it's additional to current benefits and whether there are any strings attached.

Febgirl wrote: [QUOTE=Parki] Public money should equal public knowledge.

I don't believe individual benefits received counts as 'public money' in this context. /QUOTE]

Well, it is 'public money' in this case.
It is money generated by the tax payer (The public) and paid by the Government. It is not money they have 'earnt' personally.

At the end of that day, these two woman drew public attention to the situation initially and as Paula Bennet said she wanted to make sure everyone knew the facts and that it was a rounded out arguement which I totally agree with!

It is easy to sit there and complain that they are not receiving enough benefits and get the sympathy vote etc when everyone thinks they are on a possibly minimal benefit, but I think it sheds a new and more realistic light on the situation now that people can see just how much some people actually get on while on the benefit.

If I was in the position where I was getting a benefit I would have no issue having it public knowledge.
They inform the public how much funding goes into everything else in NZ, why is this different?

but parki they werent just complaining for them but everyone who will be affected by the TIA changes... and i dont know if they did say oh woe is me! more like bugger, thats put a spanner in the works!

Paula Bennett made it personal, those two women werent personally attacking anyone but rather questioning the changes to the TIA.

Bizzy - But by making it public they have opened themsleves up for things like this to happen.

There are many things I'm sure we all complain about, but you don't make it public without expecting some sort of backlash.

I fully agree with Paula Bennet has done. She has stated facts so that NZ has a full picture and can therefore draw a fair conclusion and there is nothing wrong with that in my opinion.

As above Febgirl - If there is in fact a privacy law that has been breached then that is an issue but as far as I knew there hadn't been? (Could be wrong)


Edited by Parki

i havent read all the replies but IMO if you are going to go public about something you should expect your background/circumstances to be dug into. I havent really followed it all but i think those details should have been released.

SIT is free on some courses but is only a polytech and everyone should be entitled to a student loan to pay back. Heaps of people move here or distance learn through SIT. Education isnt a right you work for it and i believe entry requirements should be the same for everyone regardless of age, circumstance or race.

I dont agree with how student allowances are worked out on parents or partners income and living costs that you pay back are also a crock it doesnt matter if you have kids or not if you chose to study money is going to be tight. If students can get by on $150 a week to pay for EVERYTHING then surely she can budget on $700 a week or maybe wait until the kids start school to study.

The whole family benefits system is a crock as well im better off not working and collecting $214 a fortnight than going to work and paying childcare and getting nothing because it works out the same amount. Sorry off topic i think but how stupid is that!! With the childcare subsidy we could get (worked out online) we can only afford to put josh in daycare if i dont work and if i do work and dont qualify for a subsidy it would be about half of my wage!

Also my auntie and uncle separated and my cousin is staying with her dad who earns massive amounts a year but my auntie still has to pay child support even tho she is on the bones of her ass and can barely afford to put food on the table.

The whole benefits systems need to be review

I came across this before

Wednesday, 29 July 2009 - 4:06am
NZPA political reporters

Wellington, July 29 NZPA - Social Development Minister Paula Bennett says she's ready to talk to two solo mothers at the centre of a privacy row but she isn't going to apologise for releasing details of their welfare payments.

Labour has complained to Privacy Commissioner Marie Schroff about Ms Bennett's action, which was in response to the women publicly criticising the Government's decision to scrap the training incentive allowance (TIA).

Ms Bennett revealed that Natasha Fuller was receiving $715 a week and Jennifer Johnston $554 a week.

Ms Fuller says that without the TIA's $28 a week she won't be able to finish courses and get a job.


I am sure she could find $28 a week to finish her training.
We have to give up things all the time to get something we want.

Did the women in question state their income at any stage????
If they did then there is not a problem, however if they did not & the information was got by making phone calls etc, then that is different.

I think there are two issues here
-privacy
-benifits

If my family's income was made public knowledge due to my complaining about something then I would hold my head high as it was earnt by hard work & going without when needed.

So maybe the issue is pride. If these women are doing the traing to better their lives & their kids then they should be proud of that. Or is there more to this??????

i think it sucks that if you complain about something that the government is doing that you don't agree with, thyat your private information is released.

kinda like if i complained about the money being wasted in education and then my salary amount was released.

what ever happened to freedom of speech?

i don't think that this is about benefits at all, it's about the government playing "dirty" trying to discredit people who don't agree with them.

i havnt read all the posts,
but when i was on the DPB i got a student loan, i didnt get the loan for living costs or student allowance but i still got a student loan to pay my fees i didnt even know about the TIA until my case manager asked how i was paying my tuition & then she told me about it.