Tuesday, June 01, 2010
New Zealand has had a vasectomy
Prime Minister John Key surprised the Press Gallery with an announcement today that he had ordered a vasectomy for the country, after concluding that its population was just too dumb to reproduce, having yet again voted his party into power. In the silence that followed, Mr Key elaborated, saying that the steady hand of Muzza McCully had "fixed the problem once and for all", sparing the nation's manhood the indignity of rough treatment at the hands of "Crusher Collins" or "that idiot woman from Rotorua who dresses like a caricature of a Westie."
Labels: john key, judith collins, national stole your manhood, paula bennett mp
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Like Jem, the minister is truly, truly, truly outrageous
Here at BIR HQ we've been seething as we heard from mainstream media that most people just don't understand the issue at all, which is the most bitterly disappointing element of this fucking outrage.
We cannot believe that when a Minister abuses her access to departmental information for political reasons and thereby causes a serious breach of two individuals' privacy (she'd clearly breach the Privacy Act were she covered by it) the majority response is anger over the amount the two women receive in state support. Nevermind that a proportion of it likely comes via the fathers' child support payments to the IRD.
Poor show New Zealand! It's ironic that Paula Benefit and the public overlook the fact that Benefit surely approves of the amount they receive by virtue of the office she holds. She is responsible for the actions of her department, which determines and pays the support.
We know that there are privacy guidelines for Ministers that she followed (followed in the sense that she's a clueless bitch) but her actions were unprincipled in the extreme. It would have been illegal had her Ministry done it on her behalf. She has scored political points against two beneficiaries by abusing laws and then hiding behind the protections of her office. Fucking outrageous.
Our favourite analogy (from the Herald's "Your Views", where beneficiary bashers are in the majority about 20-1):
Our favourite analysis (from norightturn):
The BIR Team
We cannot believe that when a Minister abuses her access to departmental information for political reasons and thereby causes a serious breach of two individuals' privacy (she'd clearly breach the Privacy Act were she covered by it) the majority response is anger over the amount the two women receive in state support. Nevermind that a proportion of it likely comes via the fathers' child support payments to the IRD.
Poor show New Zealand! It's ironic that Paula Benefit and the public overlook the fact that Benefit surely approves of the amount they receive by virtue of the office she holds. She is responsible for the actions of her department, which determines and pays the support.
We know that there are privacy guidelines for Ministers that she followed (followed in the sense that she's a clueless bitch) but her actions were unprincipled in the extreme. It would have been illegal had her Ministry done it on her behalf. She has scored political points against two beneficiaries by abusing laws and then hiding behind the protections of her office. Fucking outrageous.
Our favourite analogy (from the Herald's "Your Views", where beneficiary bashers are in the majority about 20-1):
If I decide to go down to the local IRD office with a placard and protest that I am paying too much tax, I do not expect the IRD to release my tax records to the press.Although it should read Peter Dunne, rather than "the IRD", which would increase the impact and accuracy!
Our favourite analysis (from norightturn):
The other question is where the matter stops. What say a minister decided to release the tax return details of a complainant? Or their shonky work history? Or some criminal conviction that had been long buried? Let's face it, it's not a fair fight (Colin Espiner)
And that's the real problem here. The government collects all sorts of information about us as part of its ordinary business - information on tax, crimes or criminal complaints, health, travel, education - and we expect that the relevant departments will generally keep that information private. We do not expect it to end up in the Minister's hands to be used as political ammunition if we dare to raise our voice.
The BIR Team
Labels: ird, nasty brutish and short, national, paula bennett mp
Monday, June 30, 2008
Tough times? What tough times?
It was a chilly, blustery Saturday when I was summoned to Westgate Shopping Centre at the end of the northwestern motorway. First stop was a quick moccachino, and from inside the cafe I quickly appraised myself, and Mrs_Red, of our surroundings.
First, the parking lot was full. We're talking jammed to capacity here. Luckily for us, we had secured what appeared to be the last space, without any trouble at all.
Second, vehicles in said lot were generally of a high quality: relatively new, clean, look-like-they-are-fun-to-drive models. Most looked far superior to ours, that's for sure.
Third, people were out shopping with a vengeance. $4 moccachinos weren't the half of it. Every shop seemed to be doing a roaring trade.
Last, the drivers and shoppers referred to in the preceding points seemed relatively cheerful, inclement weather (which had no doubt attracted many to Westgate in the first instance) notwithstanding.
Which made me wonder, really ... where's this recession we're hearing about. Upon relating said observations to Mrs_Red, she responded: "the media wants there to be a recession, so National will get into power. And even if there isn't one, they want people to think there's a recession, which will achieve the same result."
It was about this time that Paula Bennett, MP, former McCully acolyte and self-described as "currently based in Waitakere" (words which suggest less a diehard commitment to the people of West Auckland than a latent desire to return to her native North Shore), drove past in her ridiculous advert-vehicle. Actually, she was a passenger, some bloke was driving.
I resolved that if she came into the cafe, I was going to invite her to open her eyes to our surroundings, and then reflect on whether National's constant bagging of the economy (best supporting actor: the media) was really justified.
But she didn't.
First, the parking lot was full. We're talking jammed to capacity here. Luckily for us, we had secured what appeared to be the last space, without any trouble at all.
Second, vehicles in said lot were generally of a high quality: relatively new, clean, look-like-they-are-fun-to-drive models. Most looked far superior to ours, that's for sure.
Third, people were out shopping with a vengeance. $4 moccachinos weren't the half of it. Every shop seemed to be doing a roaring trade.
Last, the drivers and shoppers referred to in the preceding points seemed relatively cheerful, inclement weather (which had no doubt attracted many to Westgate in the first instance) notwithstanding.
Which made me wonder, really ... where's this recession we're hearing about. Upon relating said observations to Mrs_Red, she responded: "the media wants there to be a recession, so National will get into power. And even if there isn't one, they want people to think there's a recession, which will achieve the same result."
It was about this time that Paula Bennett, MP, former McCully acolyte and self-described as "currently based in Waitakere" (words which suggest less a diehard commitment to the people of West Auckland than a latent desire to return to her native North Shore), drove past in her ridiculous advert-vehicle. Actually, she was a passenger, some bloke was driving.
I resolved that if she came into the cafe, I was going to invite her to open her eyes to our surroundings, and then reflect on whether National's constant bagging of the economy (best supporting actor: the media) was really justified.
But she didn't.
Labels: economics, media, national, paula bennett mp, westgate shopping centre
