The Minister of Social Development must go. If she doesn’t resign, Prime Minister John Key must fire her before she becomes an even bigger liability to his government.
I had high hopes for Bennett when her appointment was announced. Back then, I said she seemed “easygoing, competent, not grossly partisan”. Apparently, I was wrong on all three.
The latest trouble she’s gotten herself into happened when she revealed how much money two beneficiaries were receiving from the government. The two beneficiaries were critical of the Government’s cuts to allowances beneficiaries receive for tertiary education. Bennett claimed that since the women were publicly criticising the Government’s policies, they wouldn’t mind the disclosure of how much their receive in benefits, in the interest of “a fair debate”, as she told Newstalk ZB’s Larry Williams.
There are three main problems with Bennett’s actions: First, she deliberately broke the law—she had no legal right to reveal that information. Second, she violated the Cabinet Manual, which governs how Ministers of the Crown are to behave. She also engaged in the sort of bullying tactics former National Party Prime Minister Robert Muldoon was famous for: If anyone dared to oppose him, he’d threaten to reveal personal information and, in fact, he often did.
If Bennett remains in Cabinet, it sends a clear message that National approves of bullying as a means to silence criticism and dissent. If she’s allowed to get away with violating the Cabinet Manual, then no minister can be held accountable for bad behaviour. And if she’s allowed to get away with violating the law, it sends a message that the National Party thinks its MPs are above the law. On this last point, there may be some progress as at least one of the women is looking to file a formal complaint against Bennett.
Bennett is also a hypocrite. As an ex-beneficiary herself, she ought to understand where these women were coming from. In Parliament, she refused to disclose how much she received while on the benefit declaring—correctly—that it was nobody’s business. Apparently, Bennett meant it’s nobody’s business unless they have the gall to disagree with the National-led Government’s policies.
Her Muldoon-like bullying tactic is playing well with a certain segment of society, not just those on the right. They believe that because beneficiaries receive taxpayer money, we all have a right to know how much they get—specifically, for each beneficiary. Really? Do they want everyone knowing specifically how much their parents or grandparents are getting? Superannuation is a benefit, too.
The problem is that there are too many people in New Zealand who believe that beneficiaries are living in the lap of luxury, creaming it at taxpayer expense. This myth has been encouraged by right wing parties (including the National Party), and Bennett has now given them more reason to feel self-righteous.
Paul Bennett has failed to live up to expectations and has lurched from one mistake or gaffe to another. She is way out of her depth and if she doesn’t go now, she will certainly make another huge mistake sooner or later. John Key must cut his losses and make sure she goes now.
5 comments:
The sad thing is how many are willing to cheer her on with a 'you go Paula' and are glad she's bashing those shiftless louts on the dole. Reading the Herald's "your views" online was despairing (as it usually is, of course), with only a small group seeming to understand the bigger issues of privacy and free speech on the line here.
And now Paula and some people in the National Caucus arr crying crocodile tears over the firestorm they lit. When Bennett played the "beneficiary bashing card", she should hardly be surprised that some people gleefully carried on in the example she set. As the old saying puts it, you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. She—of all people—ought to realise how easy it is to set off beneficiary-bashing, and she ought to be deeply ashamed of herself. Oh, yeah, and she should've resigned yesterday.
Could you please post a link to an article explaining what you mean by "beneficiary". I'm not familiar with New Zeland politics and I would like to know what you're talking about, if only to contextualize your stories.
Happy Blogging.
A "beneficiary" is any person who receives government assistance, called a "benefit". It's sometimes called, often negatively, "the dole", but there are many kinds of benefits for which that term just doesn't fit. In other countries this is called "welfare".
Benefits are administered by Work and Income New Zealand (WINZ), part of the Ministry of Social Development. You can follow the link for more information on the various forms of government assistance.
Hope that helps!
tēnā rawa atu koe to both you and Google translator. It's nice to know new things.
Post a Comment