60

Last nights episode of TV 3′s 60 minutes current affairs show has certainly stirred up a hornets nest!

60 minutes has been swamped with parents affected by CYFS that they are begging for mercy, it seems everyone is angry at Ray Smith, calling him a “liar” among other things.

TV3 has been handing out the link to both this site and to CYFStalk, the traffic here has been such that it reminds me of the days when this site started, and Peter Hughes vowed to close it down (HELLO, PETER, WE ARE STILL HERE!!!).

I thought I would post this to confirm that, YES, this site WILL be getting back to its roots tonight when I finally get around to giving it the much needed makeover, including removing all political content.

CYFSwatch will be returning to its roots. Naming and Shaming CYFS social workers and publicizing its many mistakes and “boo boo’s”.

In the meantime, if you came here for help, or to support parents affected by CYFS, then please clcik on this link and join up, all details are kept STRICTLY confidential, the site is NOT hosted by Google, it is MY server and no one gets access to private data (unlike Google, facebook or any free blog…)

http://www.cyfstalk.org/

That is the sister site to this one. It helps and supports people affected by CYFS and it is totally free to join up and use.

At this point in time, THIS site is in the middle of a makeover and cannot help anyone till the weekend. After that, we WILL publish any story regarding CYFS that you send us.

Thanks.

Some time ago, I had to block my Email client from getting mail from him, his twisted thinking is not what I consider the thoughts of a sane person.

OK, so what has he done? Read the following from his blog…

————————————————————————————————

26Aug2010

EVERY Kiwi who has had their Family damaged by FAMILY Law and Social Policy or see it coming NEED to EMAIL, SNAIL MAIL the Purveyors of it, and CROWD the Buildings and Homes of those who do the damage including those who have the Power but ABUSE it, to make the changes. I. E. John Key, Paula Bennett, Peter Dunne, Simon Power, YOUR local MP, Peter Boshier, Peter Hughes, Ray Smith and other high ranking Bureaucrats.

Read our PMLetters in tabs above for clarity.

These groups below WILL bring CHANGE.

Others will probably continue to feed the **Empire of Injustice** by advising those in anguish to use the system, or brow beat you out of victim status, either by ignorance or determination, and cause pathetic Talkfest that goes nowhere because of the heavy manipulation, editing of posts, etc like MENZ, Paul’s News and CYFStalk, with their twisted information of others intent (Julie Knows) and GateKeeping those who would make progress (Ward-n-Laing Show) and 3 /4 others to a lesser degree.

I have deliberately left their comments and Emails on this site to expose their whiley ways, including in the ABOUT, although they are now blocked so we can move fwd. One in fact tried to take this BLOG down but as you will see WordPress have apologized for the inconvenience we received.

On the 21st, one of our members received a phone call from someone connected to Jim Bailey who suggested ALL “anti CYFS” groups unite under one group, namely, his. Our members considered this idea and rejected it.

To Jim Bailey, I say this. Sending Emails to politicians, judges and social workers, using profanity and insults is not the way to seek change, nor is advocating violence towards these people would be a BIG mistake, storming their homes is home invasion, storming their offices will only land you in Court.

Besides, you seek “equal parenting” but what example is this setting for parents and worse, to children? I am told that you were once a decent person fighting for change, what has changed to make you so bitter and twisted?

What you say about CYFStalk is wrong, in fact, it is nothing but lies. Is this pay back for us rejecting your “offer” to unite? I am told that you now think that if you cannot take us over, you will destroy us?

We are not the enemy, the members of CYFStalk are making great strides in helping parents fight for their children, and, unlike you, we have the support of a few M.P’s and are about to take our fight to parliament itself, we will, with the support of our friendly MPs, possibly even get a face to face meeting with Paula Bennet.

To have YOU destroy that with YOUR actions does not help the parents you claim to be fighting for. What good will it do to have parents turned into criminals? It will make their fight against CYFS so much harder.

Helping parents is what CYFStalk does, it is only now progressing to the legal protest and advocacy stage, as such, we told you that we did not wish to be associated with you or your group because you are harming the good work we are doing, and this is your pay back is it?

Then all I will say is that you are insane, a bitter and twisted old man who has lost sight of all things decent. This is even more reason that we made the right decision in rejecting your offer to unite.

To answer your lies, no post on CYFStalk has ever been edited. We have members from all over the world,  “free speech with respect” is a concept we hold dear to our hearts, even when one of your members came and advertised his face book page, we did not edit nor delete his post, but in the spirit of free speech, a few members warned everyone else that joining that facebook page would be a mistake and said why.

CYFStalk has a public area and a members only area, the public area is for anyone to post in and debate the issues, the members only area is where we can help parents fight CYFS, and we have had great success stories, we do not use those stories to gloat, but we do have successes, we empower parents with information, help, advice and most of all, support.

We do that in a measured and calm way, we NEVER, unlike you, advocate storming the Prime Minister office because that will only make things worse for the parents.

Possibly this year, or next year, we will be INSIDE parliament TALKING to the politicians about what is going on, no doubt, you will be OUTSIDE Parliament YELLING at the politicians, making OUR job harder because MPs will think we support you… but we do not and while YOU are involved in your group, we never will be.

DESPITE what you say, we will continue doing the good work we do, without fanfare, without making waves and without advocating parents and members of the public become criminals. WE will continue to grow, while your group struggles to get members.

We will put our success stories against your groups any day, I suspect the truth will then come out, YOU do more harm than good.

YOU, sir, are a waste of time, resorting to lies and advocating criminal activities … you do NO ONE any favors, and most of all, you do the cause you claim to fight for a great deal of harm.

We will continue as we have since March of 2007, HELPING parents.

”

insane

nuff said”

You were the one having a fight with the media at one point and you argued that that internet blogging was the “new mainstream media”…

Hardly a conversation then is it?

If that is the best you can come up with, then you will be found guilty.

Why don’t you stop being a benefit bludger and get a real job.

But slowly, I’m making a come back. The first thing I wish to talk about is the economy, then about the Labour Party, and lastly, about this site.

THE ECONOMY

During the last week, National was shocked to announce the latest unemployment figures, its bought them back to Earth, and they are looking at why this is happening.

Look no further… the entire National party is to blame. Exports are doing fine, we are exporting more than ever, but no one is spending any money, the local economy is declining, WELL DUH….

Since National was elected, they have increased costs for all households in New Zealand, we got the ACC increase, the ETS fees, cutbacks in Government spending… sure, we had tax cuts, the low waged got a little, those on benefits got nothing, the wealthy got the BEST of the lot, so why are they not spending?

Well, they are, on imported cars, holidays, and playing the share market. None of this benefits the local economy. John Key made a big deal that these tax cuts would keep people in New Zealand rather than having them run off to Australia for a better life. It didn’t work did it, wages there increased $40 a week, John Key increased the minimum wage by, what was it? fifty cents a week?

And this is not even October when G.S.T. goes up.

Inflation is going to exceed 5% this year, that is evidence that our economy is in dire straights, because that rate, with a stagnant economy and increasing unemplyment means things will get much MUCH worse.

What amazes me is that John Key is still so popular, why? He sold us out and threw us to the wolves while looking after his wealthy mates. John Key should be sacked and locked up for treason.

The last thing we need is for the wealthy to be rewarded for leeching off the workers for so long, they are the LAST people that need help in our society.

THE LABOUR PARTY

A great many people think Chris Carter should resign NOW, but the fact is, Phil Goff should have sacked him when the credit card scandal broke. Had he done that then, the people might have liked him more.

The fact that he didn’t suggests he doesn’t care that Carter was ripping off the tax payer… even now, he doesn’t care, he is more concerned that he was disloyal to HIM, as leader.

And Labour wonders why no one likes them anymore. OPEN YOUR EYES.

THIS SITE

Ok, the promised changes to this site will happen this week sometime. Why it didn’t happen before is because of my brothers suicide.

On a happier note, we have located a NEW CYFSwatch, and when he arrives, I’ll let him introduce himself.

All I can say is, get ready for some fireworks. There will also be a new Email for anyone who wants to, to send him your stories.

This site will be getting back to its core job of naming and shaming social workers.

BRUCE COLLINGWOOD: Stood over Whetu Abraham and appeared to be very angry, rest home staff said.

By NATHAN BEAUMONT – The Dominion Post

The pastor of a Napier church that took at least $20,000 in donations from a disabled rest home resident has allegedly tried to “heavy” the man into signing a document clearing the church of blame.

Napier’s Oasis Elim Church pastor Bruce Collingwood confirmed he turned up at the rest home yesterday to ask Whetu Abraham, who uses a wheelchair, to sign the document.

Otatara Rest Care and Rehabilitation manager Lucy Dever described the move as disgusting. Staff stopped Mr Abraham signing the letter until he had legal advice.

Ms Dever trespassed Mr Collingwood from the rest home.

“He was standing over Whetu and [appeared to be] very angry. This guy was way out of line. He tried to heavy him into signing the letter.”

Mr Collingwood’s actions came after The Dominion Post revealed the church took nearly $12,000 from Mr Abraham last year and about $10,000 in 2008.

Mr Abraham, 54, is a partial tetraplegic with head injuries, after being hit by a car in 1986. Ms Dever said the church now had the last of his life savings and he could not afford dental care for rotting teeth.

Mr Collingwood refused to let The Dominion Post see the letter he wanted Mr Abraham to sign.

“Oh, man, I don’t know what I should say here. I read him a letter that I had written. Whetu and I have an understanding. We’ve got a good relationship and it could all be sorted out.”

Mr Collingwood said Mr Abraham had donated the money willingly “out of his own heart”.

They talked about his financial and medical situation and Mr Collingwood was comfortable taking the money. “We had that conversation. I talked to him and asked him if he can afford it, absolutely. He said he wanted to give it and that was the end of that. If you get given a gift you just receive the gift out of the good nature it was intended.”

The church had lived on the “smell of an oily rag” for the past 11 years and the money was a lifeline.

Ms Dever said earlier that the church rejected her plea to stop accepting large donations from Mr Abraham and came to the rest home to give him a donation certificate so he could claim a third of the money back from Inland Revenue.

Elim Church of New Zealand has condemned the Napier branch’s activities. Spokesman Chris Bethwaite said an investigation had begun. “This is not the sort of behaviour we would condone, taking money from someone who can’t afford it. We are working with the church to get all the facts. Whether there is any disciplinary action remains to be seen.”

The organisation did not have a policy on donations; individual churches decided for themselves. “But they are told not to put pressure on anyone. We have never had complaints before.

“Most churches get by because of the generosity of people. You don’t investigate every person that gives money to a church to find out whether they can afford it or not.

========================================

SO…. this Church is like the Mongrel Mob, Yes? No? Using stand over tactics is despicable and the Police should be called in.

Many changes are planned, such as all political content being moved to another blog altogether, and this blog will return to its roots, naming and shaming corrupt CYFS social workers.

By PHIL KITCHIN – The Dominion Post

A Napier church took at least $20,000 in donations from a disabled rest home resident with head injuries and rejected pleas not to take the last of his life savings.

In less than eight months last year, Napier’s Oasis Elim Church took nearly $12,000 from Otatara Rest Care and Rehabilitation resident Whetu Abraham who uses a wheelchair.

Rest home manager Lucy Dever said the church now had the last of Mr Abraham’s life savings and he could not afford dental care for rotting teeth.

Mr Abraham, 54, was a partial tetraplegic with head injuries, after being hit by a car in 1986, Ms Dever said.

“He’s got no family or next-of-kin on our list, and they’ve taken everything from him. It is unethical, immoral and I believe un-Christian.

“He used to have a nest egg but now he has no life savings. He believes if he doesn’t give it to them, he won’t go to heaven.”

About a year ago, when she discovered the rate at which Mr Abraham was handing over his life savings – he gave about $10,000 in 2008 – she spoke to church pastor Bruce Collingwood.

“I explained that he is not a wealthy man. He is nearly on the poverty line and the money he had, he needed. Sure, some could go to the church, but not all of it.

“The pastor said it was Whetu’s choice and said it was tithing [taking a tenth of a person's income for the church],” Ms Dever said.

She questioned how it could be tithing as Mr Abraham was “certainly not” on an income of at least $100,000 for the church to take 10 per cent.

Ms Dever said the church rejected her appeal to stop accepting large donations from Mr Abraham and came to the rest home to give him a donation certificate so he could claim a third of the money back from Inland Revenue.

“I guess they wanted that from him too,” she said.

The following year the church received $11,895 from Mr Abraham including one donation of $5000 in May.

Mr Abraham said he gave the church money because of his faith.

“Hopefully, my understanding is simple, you help them, they help you. They used to come and visit me [in the rest home] but it’s not often now.”

Mr Abraham said he also catered for weddings at the church, buying from a local bakery, but he stopped doing that when “I didn’t get recognised”.

Ms Dever said she spoke again to Mr Collingwood in April this year when she discovered Mr Abraham had exhausted his life savings.

“He [Mr Collingwood] said there was nothing wrong with what they were doing and he has a different outlook on money.

“I said most people would think that accepting huge amounts from someone with nothing is wrong,” Ms Dever said. “I tried to reason with him and asked him to give the money back but he wouldn’t.”

Mr Collingwood declined to comment yesterday.

“I don’t like the spin of the media. No comment at all thank you.”

A Victoria University religious studies lecturer, Geoff Troughton, said tithing generally meant taking a tenth of a person’s income but the word had different meanings for different churches and cultures.

He said Pentecostal churches like Elim were often a “more enclosed complete social world” and tended to take a stronger position on biblical teaching on giving donations than other churches such as Anglican.

By CLIO FRANCIS – Stuff

A woman who allegedly slammed a toddler’s head against a door with such force it left dents in the wood, is undoubtedly responsible for his death, a court has been told.

Dylan Rimoni, 3, died on April 18, 2008, in Auckland’s Starship children’s hospital after his life support was turned off. An autopsy showed he died from head injuries.

His carer, Patricia Angela Pickering, 38, is charged with murdering the boy after bashing his head against a hard surface.

Pickering, who is on trial in the High Court at Auckland, also faces two charges of grievous bodily harm and one charge of assault. She has denied all charges.

Yesterday, Crown prosecutor Philip Hamlin told the court Dylan was given to Pickering to care for because the boy was in need of a mother and Pickering wanted a child. He had been removed from his birth parents’ care after allegations of neglect and abuse.

Although it appeared a dream come true for both Pickering and the boy, the reality was quite different, Mr Hamlin said.

“This child was beaten for a long time. He was hit, cut and maltreated over the period he was in Ms Pickering’s care. In the end he was dead, in her arms, effectively.”

The jury was shown a cupboard door with two dents in the wood that the Crown claims were caused by the boy’s head hitting it with force.

Evidence had been given to the court by Pickering’s neighbours, who heard angry yelling at the house. One neighbour had heard Pickering yell: “Shut the f… up, shut up”. Another heard her say: “If you do not shut your mouth, I’m going to punch your head.”

Neighbours also gave evidence of seeing Pickering roughly handling a child outside the house a month before Dylan’s death, Mr Hamlin said.

Pickering had then lied to police about what had really happened, blaming Dylan’s injuries on him being a “clumsy” child.

“Toddlers do not run around and get significant brain injuries.” The trial is continuing.

=================================================

Why was CYFS not mentioned by name? Is this another cover up by social workers? Did the prosecutor agree not to mention CYFS by name? Could this be another failure by CYFS who desperately want to avoid more bad publicity?

Who, from CYFS will ever be held to account? Anyone?

Will our freeloading MP’s ever speak up about these failures or are they too busy buying flowers for their partners? (or watching porn)

Will CYFS hold yet another internal investigation and have it say “oh dear, how sad, never mind… but we promise to do better next time…”

How many promises have been broken so far? Nothing changes, CYFS keeps on failing the children of New Zealand…

They are a complete waste of money.

How can they live with themselves?

A (perverted) CROOK!

$500 worth of Chinese food?????? Massages? Clothes? PORNO MOVIES?????

Chris Carter, the homosexual politician even bought flowers for his partner on his birthday… but is that love???? NO!!!! Not when the tax payer had to foot the bill, if Carter really loved his gay partner, he would have paid for the flowers himself.

OK, so Carter did say that the rules were different back then…. LIKE HELL, the rules have ALWAYS stated that Ministers cannot… repeat, CANNOT use the credit cards for personal use… and Carter KNEW that, he was REPEATEDLY told that he had to obey the rules… so what changed?

Simple… PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY!!!! That is the ONLY thing that has changed, back when this abuse happened, most Ministers assumed the tax payers would never find out how they were ripping us off.

Its not just Labour politicians… its National Ministers as well.

So the big question is… how are the politicians ripping us off hoping we won’t ever find out? This CANNOT be the only way… we know the likes of Bill English was ripping us off with his mortgage payments, so realistically, this can ONLY be the tip of the iceberg.

They MUST be ripping us off in other ways… and for how long? Has this been going on since we became self governing? PROBABLY, think about it, the British politicians have recently been caught out in a similar scam…

OK, Paula Bennet would be the first to demand that anyone on a benefit caught ripping off the system should and would be charged and hauled before the Courts…

So, will these CROOKS in our Parliament be hauled before the Courts? Hell no!

Should they be? HELL YES!

Also, Shame (sic) Jones was the Minister of Housing… he was charging porno movies to the taxpayer while people living in leaky homes waited for compensation…

AND HOW THE F**K COULD THAT FAT F**K, Parekura Horomia eat $500 WORTH OF CHINESE FOOD? The poor living in New Zealand would consider $10 worth of Chinese Food a “once in the blue moon treat”…

ACCOUNTABILITY!!!!! That is what we demand from our politicians, and if we cannot expect it from them, then what example is that setting to public servants like CYFS social workers…

THEY SHOULD BE EXPELLED FROM PARLIAMENT AND HAULED BEFORE THE COURTS….

ALL POLITICIANS MUST BE CORRUPT!

NONE OF THEM ARE WORTH VOTING FOR!

UPDATE: Annette King, Deputy Leader of the Labour party has said she won’t comment of the right or wrong of Shame (sic) Jones watching porno movies… she said “Its not for me to tell him what he can or cannot do in the privacy of his room…” …… oh really???? BUT, she, along with her previous Government found it acceptable to tell parents how to discipline children in the privacy of their own homes….. whats good for the people should also be good enough for the CROOKS… don’t you think, M/s King?

Hypocrite!

“nuff said”

In 2005 a UNICEF /INNOCENT study reported New Zealand to have the 3rd worst child death from maltreatment rate out of 27 OECD countries. This level of child abuse deaths is 4 to 6 times higher than the average for the leading counties (UNICEF New Zealand 2006). Given these statistics, and a number of high profile cases, it is hardly surprising that the Department of Child Youth and Family are subject to criticism from the media and the public. No matter how much Peter Hughes denies it, our child welfare system is clearly inadequate and need of urgent reform.

The failure of CYFS to protect children goes hand in hand with gross professional incompetence among a large proportion of it’s front line social work staff. Such incompetence not only fails children, but also leads to state intervention in people’s lives that borderlines human rights violations.

This website is now giving service users the opportunity to tell and describe their experiences and express their frustrations about their involvement with CYFS. Given that the organisation has the authority to remove people’s children, CYF’s may wish to embrace this opportunity and use this valuable service user feedback to make positive changes in their services. After all, removing a child from their parent’s care is an extremely serious matter and one that CYFS would wish to perform with the utmost professionalism and child focus.

Currently the system is unfair and punitive to parents. A consequence of this is that it is unhelpful and potentially abusive to children. For example, in line with the legislation all notifications made to CYFS, regardless of their nature, are responded to with a child protection investigation. Checks with other agencies can be made and children interviewed at school without informing the parent’s or seeking their consent. It is the social workers job to investigate allegations of abuse rather than assess the needs of a child. Effectively this is a policing rather than a social work role and it is this policing element of CYFS social work that creates an environment in which clients are inclined to be defensive, hostile or non co-operative. This is exacerbated at sites where all investigations are undertaken through unannounced home visiting. Such an approach treats parents as abusers rather than families that may require help and support. Furthermore, it does not enable the social worker and the parent to work in partnership with each other – an absolutely crucial aspect of effective social work practice.

The Family Court should offer a system of checks and balances. In reality it merely rubber stamps the majority of applications made by social workers supplying poorly evidenced, badly written affidavits. The Court rarely ask social workers to explain the basis of their decision making and, more concerning, seldom asks CYFS where they intend to place a child should they give the department guardianship.

The removal of children is rarely planned and generally appears to occur on an arbitrary basis. No consideration is given to placement planning, contact arrangements or attachment issues. Extended family (whanau) members are approached when a child needs to be removed from their primary care giver. However, within Maori culture, whanau can include friends, neighbours and non blood relatives who do not have a prior relationship with the child. Such placement is seen as culturally sensitive practice as it is consistent with Maori tradition. Conveniently it is also a very cheap option for the government. It is not of course, always in the best interests of the child.

State care is offered in a variety of different forms. There are care givers homes in which approved carers live in a house owned by Child, Youth and Family. The care givers homes I have visited have all had eight children placed at any one time, in my view prime conditions for abuse to occur. There are also foster carers, but the process for assessing them includes only one home visit, which is entirely inadequate.

In some circumstances children can be placed in secure “Care and Protection” units. This can be on the authority of CYFS alone and does not need to be sanctioned by a court. The secure unit I visited keeps children in cells in which there were no posters, no television and no CD player. The steel doors had peep holes in order for these children and adolescents to be checked up on every half an hour during the night. This is not consistent with the standard developmental needs of most adolescents, who require privacy. Children placed in such institutions have been identified as needing protection, they are not violent criminals.

Given the child abuse rate and the unethical practices employed by CYFS it comes as no surprise that service users feel the need to express their frustrations about their experiences on this website. CYFS have a choice in how they respond to such criticism. They can either adopt a defensive strategy, dismiss the website and continue to believe that the service is beyond reproach. Or they can accept the contents of the website as legitimate service user feed back in the absence of any attempt to collect such information themselves. If Peter Hughes chooses to dismiss the site then he merely reinforces the point being made- that service users are not respected or listened to by CYFS.

POSTED BY CYFSWATCH AT 09:19
LABELS: GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE NEED FOR CHANGE AT CYFS.

(sorry there is no date with this, but isn;t it interesting to note that NOTHING has changed? Peter Hughes still lives in his little fantasy world where his social workers are the “best in the world”! This story came courtesy of someone on the CYFStalk forums who knows firsthand just what a dysfunctional agency CYFS really is.)

Poor little Moron!

Bradford shelves super-city ambitions

By JOHN HARTEVELT – The Dominion Post

Former Green Party MP Sue Bradford has abandoned plans to run for the Auckland super-city council, saying she has been left high and dry by her party.

The Green Party is gathering in Christchurch today for its annual conference. Ms Bradford will miss it for the first time in 12 years.

“I don’t have a role there,” Ms Bradford said. I’ve lost my place to stand with the Green Party.”

She had seriously considered running for a place as a councillor on the super-city board but had reluctantly backed out.

“I came to see that I didn’t have the support of Labour and the Greens.”

An independent campaign would have been costly and she did not want to split the Left-wing vote.

Asked if she was disappointed by the lack of support, Ms Bradford said: “I’m just being realistic really.”

Ms Bradford is still a member of the Greens, but after quitting Parliament in October, has gradually withdrawn from party work.

She was defeated by Metiria Turei in a bid for co-leadership at last year’s conference.

“The party made a choice that they didn’t want me, really,” Ms Bradford said. “So that leaves me in a political vacuum.”

Ms Bradford has started work on a PhD in public policy at Auckland University and said she was working as an activist for organisations she believed in.

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said yesterday: “At the time, we said we were sorry to see Sue step down as an MP and I stand by that.”

=============================================

That last part is very telling… its saying “Yes, we were sad she left, but now, we are very VERY glad she took her toys and left the playpen!”

If anyone is wondering EXACTLY what the Greens think of Sue “the moron” Bradford, they only need to search out the story on this site where they admit a few things about Bradford.

I was sent a link to the above news item by someone very senior in the Green party who also added this;

“We just wish she could take a hint and F**K OFF, not just out of Green politics, but out of New Zealand. Maybe she would be happier in North Korea”

The “source” added that thanks to her, the Green party is still suffering in the polls, and when anyone ever mentions the Greens, always but ALWAYS the so called anti smacking bill is mentioned. Sue Bradford and “that” bill has done so much harm to our cause. I can understand why Russell is starting to get annoyed with Bradford, it seems like she is so stupid she cannot take a hint.

Well, all I can say is TOUGH, they must have known Bradford had a hidden agenda years ago, when she first stood for the Alliance, they must have known that “once a communist, ALWAYS a communist!”

The Greens did this to themselves.

God forbid if Sue ever got to be in a position of power again! She knows the only way she can regain any sort of power is with a party, but she is so stupid she cannot see that the Greens are glad she is no longer in Parliament. They would love it if she resigned from the party and stopped telling people she was a “Green” when really, she is a nanny state Communist.

I don’t have much time for Auckland, but I am glad she won’t have a chance to inflict suffering on JAFA’s… its tough enough having to live in a city which stinks of exhaust fumes… but even I wouldn’t want Sue anywhere near a position of power in the Auckland super city.

Or maybe the truth is that someone explained to Sue that local body elections do not use the M.M.P. system! Lets face it, Bradford must know that in any FAIR race, there’s no way on Earth she could ever win fairly.

I actually agree with Russel Norman, because at the time, I too was sad to see the “media whore” leave Parliament, because her attempts to have this site closed down or bring negative publicity to it actually gained us a hell of a lot of goodwill and supporters… since she left, its been harder to get any decent publicity. But like Russel, now, I’m glad the mental bitch is gone… politics seems a lot saner now, and besides, with National wanting to mine DoC land, the Greens NEED to stay focused.. they don’t need to be sidetracked by Bradford and her hidden agenda.

She couldn’t win an election if she was the only one standing!!!

And since we now know that the Justice Department hacked this website and probably made it easier for my twitter account to be hacked, well, the bitch STILL needs to say sorry for that. I am just glad that the Police *know* what she is like, I’m still waiting for anyone from the Police to turn up and question me over that, sort of makes a liar out of Bradford when said the “Police are investigating”.

BUT… it must be really sad for her to know that her old workmates cannot stand her and don;t want her back anymore, poor Sue. WELL…. allow me to cheer you up…

…Let me just say that I miss you, I’m glad you are not in a position of power anymore,  but I still miss you. I miss the publicity you gave this site, nothing more, nothing less, I still cannot stand you, but I do miss  the publicity you gave this site!

Oh, and I see you are still being a media whore… BUT, its nice that you told us that you won’t be standing for the super city, now the people can rejoice and rest easy that you wont weasel your way into any position of power. I think the Greens would be happier if you just dropped dead… OH, that’s not a death threat by the way, so before going to the media, have a lawyer check it out for you.

Bradford, get with it, you are YESTERDAY’S NEWS! No one cares about you, no one likes you, no one cares about the two bit protest groups you belong to now, and especially stop bleating about how everyone has turned their backs on you… YOU DID THAT TO YOURSELF…

If you want pity and sympathy … forget it. I’m glad the Greens turned their backs on you, really I am, I’m even considering voting for them since YOU are not there anymore.

“nuff said” and DROP DEAD, BRADFORD! (and again, that is NOT a death threat, actually, its a wish…. nothing more, nothing less!)

budget for the rich

I have always maintained that what Governments say, is not important, really, to the bigger picture. What is more important, however, is what they do NOT say. In fact, what they do say should be studied for the hidden meanings.

So it is with Bill English’s 2010 Budget, his second.

For starters, those on low incomes and benefits were told that they would be no worse off than before the budget was released… to me, this means they will be worse off AFTER the budget measures are actually implemented, which will mostly be in October.

For starters, John Key (most popular prime Minister EVER according to the wealthy) said that those on benefits would be compensated, they would be no worse off… really? 2% benefit rise to cover a 2.5% rise in G.S.T.?

Worse yet, that 2% rise to benefits in October will be REMOVED at the next cost of living rise in April next year. This means, if the cost of living rises 4% then you WILL get 4% but you would already have gotten 2% of that rise… it is only “compensation” till the next cost of living increase.

Worse yet, in both October and April, any rise to benefits will mean you are getting more money, right? So by the rules WINZ works under, your accommodation allowance will be readjusted…

Every year, at April, people on benefits get a rise, but also, a reduction in their benefits when accommodation supplements are readjusted. Most years, those on benefits only get enough to buy a loaf of bread, or not, for some, but they have to pay more for electricity, transport and everything else that costs more.

So come April, those on benefits will be MUCH worse off. Even those getting superannuation.

Workers will also feel the full brunt of this National Government lie.

The tax cut is barely enough to cover the rise in G.S.T. but guess what, the next time you try to argue for a wage rise to your employer, they will say they cannot afford it, besides, you JUST got a tax cut, you have no reason to ask for more money.

This is what happened with the last tax cuts National gave the less well off. Wages were stagnant in 2009. This is what will happen again AND THAT IS OFFICIAL….. I heard a banker on TV say that the employers wage bill will not rise much this year because of the tax cuts, so, in his words, it was a good budget.

So what about inflation? Treasury says it will spike at 5.9% this year because of the rise in G.S.T. and Bill English said it would be a oncer, then it would go down. BUT, 5.9% will STILL be there, that food you buy each week wont drop next time? So why is English trying to fudge over this detail?

The tax cuts and compensation to those on benefits will be wiped out by a 5.9% inflation rate, even if its only for one quarter. Worse yet, when the Governments “Emission Trading Scheme” comes into effect, prices will rise even more.

So, why is Bill English doing this? On Q+A today, he said he cared very much about the poor of this nation, LIKE HELL! As said on Q+A, if he really cared, then he wouldn’t have screwed the poor even more into the dirt (not in so many words, but that is the gist of it…)

This was a budget for the RICH of this nation, the blood sucking leeches who object to paying ANY tax and hide it where they can. So, Bill English decided to make it harder for them, his method was to DROP the top tax bracket to match that which Family Trusts pay… his logic was that if they are both the same, then they wont try to dodge tax.

Remember the logic for raising the ACC levy? It had to pay its own way, so EVERYONE was stung with a higher fee. But that is only for the poor. If the poor had a tax loophole, then you can bet that Bill English, like they did with ACC, would have INCREASED the tax on trusts… not lowered them.

One Journalist said that the logic Bill English used was like saying that all athletes at the Olympics cheat by taking steroids, so to fix it, ALL athletes should be allowed to take steroids.

But, amazingly, in closing that tax loophole BY REWARDING THEM, he opened up another one. He dropped the company tax rate to 28%

Those in trusts will now “invest” their money in companies to avoid the higher tax bracket.

So, those on benefits have effectively had a cut in their benefits, the low wage earners have had a pay cut, and the wealthy are laughing all the way to the bank.

National says that they lowered the tax bracket for the wealthy to keep them in New Zealand, really? I reckon it would be much better if these tax cheats just FU*KED off out of NZ, because unless the Government starts to care for the poor in NZ, it is THEY will will leave NZ for Australia and then who would do all the work?

Who would clean the rich peoples floor? Cook their meals? Grow the food they eat? Package it?

I would rather have a nation of tax payers than a nation of tax cheats… and a lot of the rich are just that, TAX CHEATS, and that includes most MP’s… most of them (including Bill English) has a Family Trust.

Bill English should wake up to the fact that it is NOT the rich leaving our shores, BUT THE WORKERS! The rich stay because they know they have it GREAT here thanks to a National Government which makes life so easy for them.

Bill English is the puppet of the rich.

EVACUATION: Police at the cordon surrounding the area near the Beehive after a suspicious package was found.

Dominion Post

LATEST: The Beehive in Wellington has been evacuated while police investigate a suspicious package.

Security guards and police began ordering people – including ministers – from the Beehive and Parliament Buildings shortly before 9am.

Parliamentary Services spokesman Warren Inkster said the package was found just before 9am by a worker arriving for work.

Mr Inkster said the evacuation was precautionary and police and emergency services were at the scene.

There is traffic disruption in the area, with police closing down Molesworth St on the east side of the Beehive with a cordon stopping traffic and the Fire Service is also at the scene.

Sources have said the suspicious package was found on the 5th floor. Among Cabinet Ministers with offices on the fifth floor are Paula Bennett, Steven Joyce and Anne Tolley.

A police communications spokesman would only say police were dealing with “a matter”.

- With NZPA

===================================================

Thank GOD Sue “the moron” Bradford is no longer at Parliament, no doubt she would blame me without any evidence AND call me a liar if I denied it.

By NICK KRAUSE – BusinessDay.co.nz

A Yellow Pages Group copyright court case against a marketing database company heard submissions yesterday about an Internal Affairs Department raid on the alleged copyright violator.

Yellow Pages accuses Image Marketing Group of stealing its phonebook databases of about 315,000 businesses, information that it then allegedly sold on in its products.

Lawyers were in the High Court in Auckland before Justice Douglas White giving submissions on varying the terms of a previous injunction.

Toby Futter, counsel for IMG, Online Business Directory and principal Brendan Battles, said his client was fearful of his future with demands to break confidentiality of clients by coughing up their names and details to Yellow Pages.

He said Mr Battles had already had emails questioning media reports of allegedly stolen databases and a subsequent request for a refund from a client. One of the variations to the injunction sought to protect that confidentiality.

Mr Futter also told the court of a Internal Affairs raid on his client’s business where personal property was ransacked and material seized.

“How did they [the plaintiff and counsel] know of the raid and what was taken … how did information become known?” He spoke of his client’s lack of faith and drew attention to “a government agency … sharing information with counsel”.

“This information [taken in the raid] should not be available in a civil suit. The Department of Internal Affairs should not have disclosed this information.”

The court also spent time looking at the relevance of a recent Australian federal court ruling that determined there was no copyright on the White Pages or Yellow Pages produced by Sensis, Telstra’s directories business.

Yellow Pages lawyer Kim McLeod said: “We’re entitled to enforce our rights against another who infringes [upon our intellectual property].”

IMG’s continuing activities were causing damage to his client. “The damage is ongoing and the plaintiff is entitled to know [the names and addresses sought] and if necessary come back to this court and deal with this.”

Mr Futter said there had been no breach of copyright.

=============================================================

First, the Justice Department hacks this site, then, the Police prosecute upon Political orders, and now this… the Ministry of Internal Affairs has really overstepped the mark here.

Sadly, we will see a lot more of this while we have a corrupt Government in power.

The Nanny State

I saw Hone “the racist” on Q+A today. This is what he said about the 10% price rise on tobacco products; “Its tough Love”. So, Hone thinks Parliament are the parents, and the rest of us are children. But why no price rise on Alcohol? Simple, according to Hone “the racist” when he gave his answer; “Probably because the rich drink”.

So, National is still supporting their rich mates… but wait, it gets a lot worse.

A few weeks ago, Pita Sharples the Maori co-leader went to New York IN SECRET to sign New Zealand up to the “rights of the indigenous people”. Last week, the price rise on tobacco was done in virtual secrecy when National decided to pass the legislation as a “matter of urgency” and it was a done deal in a matter of hours.

Why? Because both episodes gave voters very little time to talk about it, meaning, damage to National support was at a minimum. Certainly, the tobacco price rise should NEVER have been a matter of urgency, there was no emergency as far as the economy goes… it COULD have been debated normally… so why wasn’t it?

Smokers have never caused me injury, but every day, I see in the news where drunk drivers have been pulled over and arrested, or worse, injured men, women and children traveling in cars that have been plowed into by drunk drivers, worse case, innocent people have been killed.

Sure, I am a smoker, I wished I wasn’t, but raising the price is not the way to do it, the way it was done is an abuse of power, if it is so bad for us, then why not outlaw it all together and double the price of booze? Passive smoking is bad for people, but at least any objectors can ask me NOT to smoke, if I was driving along with a drunbk driver heading towards me, I don’t get to ask them NOT to drive do I? Boozers are a worse threat to out health than smokers are.

Lets take it a step further, increasing the price of alcohol might get a few to give it up, in which case, the Police can concentrate on OTHER issues. It would be a win win situation.

So Hone “the racist” may well be right, the price of booze was not touched because lets face it, “the rich drink”.

But what happens next time when National wants to pass something that might hurt it in the polls? Will they keep it secret and then “take urgency on it” so its a done deal? Other bills that might get this treatment would be the “seabed and foreshore repeal bill” the bill that allows mining on DoC land, given that 50,000 people marched against it in Auckland yesterday, I’d say that would be a certainty. Having unpopular bills discussed in the media for any great deal of time harms the governing party, John Key knows this. What happens when Paula Bennet decides to cut benefits?

And what about this enormous power a MINOR party, like the Maori party, seems to have in this Government? Its similar to when Labour was in power and the Greens were doing their little pet projects. It seems to be the minor parties nowadays who indulge in nanny state politics.

If anything, John Key knows what he is doing, selling out to a minor party for their support on things like raising GST and allowing mining. Ironic then that he was also the one that wanted a binding referendum on the way we elect our Governments. What chance does MMP have now? Maybe he saw the writing on the wall, and that is why it will take nearly a decade to change the system we use, by then, National will not be in power (or so he thinks) and it will be Labours problem.

It is also ironic that the Maori party is so concerned about our health, it wants to ban tobacco from the shelves, or at least, that is the ultimate aim, but that won’t ever happen, Bill English would lose a great deal of tax money and he needs it to lower the tax rate for the wealthy. But more importantly, booze is more of a problem for Maori people, many more crimes are committed by Maori on booze than Maori who smoke… and in most cases, these Maori end up with serious health issues due to booze, or end up in hospital due to drunk driving.

Seems to me, the first thing the Maori party should have done was demand the tax on booze rise with the price of tobacco. I wonder if the Maori party will support raising the drinking age again seeing as most Maori youth drink to excess and this causes many social problems for their culture.

I wonder how they voted on laws to combat cannabis smoking, or “P” addiction? I know Sue Bradford, when she was an MP, voted against tougher measures for those who manufacture “P”.

New Zealand is fast heading down the track of corruption. Not only do the minor parties wield to much power with John Key’s Government, but National is attempting to “buy” their support in such a way as to deny the people the right to have their voices heard.

The budget will be an interesting one this year. GST will rise so the wealthy can have a tax cut, but also, I wonder will also be cut in the budget to pay for the support National gets from the minor parties? I shudder to think.

It proves, yet again, that NONE of the bastards are worth voting for.

legal1

NZPA

An Auckland teacher has been cleared of sex charges against a teenage girl in one of his classes.

After fours hours of deliberation, an Auckland District Court jury this morning found the 42-year-old, who has name suppression, not guilty of three charges of indecently assaulting the girl around eight years ago.

The names of the school and the now adult complainant are also suppressed.

The girl was 14 and 15 and the teacher 34 and 35, when the alleged offending took place between February 2001 and September 2002.

The Crown alleged the pair had a relationship starting with non-school related emails, then gifts, including flowers and underwear.

The teacher and the girl started spending time alone on school premises outside school hours, it was alleged, and on several occasions, there was kissing and touching involved.

The teacher denied the alleged incidents happened.

=======================================================

And this is one of the people Cameron Slater named on his blog… and he now leaves himself wide open to be sued by the Teacher.

To the teacher, I say… GO FOR IT!

UN DECLARATION: Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples at the United Nations forum on Indigenous Issues.

NZPA

United Nations declarations are often a first step towards binding conventions, public law specialist Mai Chen said today, a day after the Government’s affirmation of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.

Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples, in his role as Maori Affairs Minister, made the announcement in New York yesterday.

ACT, which is also a government support partner, was upset it was not told the affirmation would be made, especially as it strongly disagrees with it.

The declaration sets out the rights of indigenous people, including ownership of land they have always occupied and protection of their language and culture.

It is non-binding but the previous government refused to support it over legal concerns.

The Government said it was simply “aspirational” and its support statement carried the caveat that New Zealand’s laws would define the bounds of engagement with the declaration, and it would not impact on the Treaty of Waitangi.

But though Dr Sharples told the UN there were no caveats to New Zealand support, Prime Minister John Key played down the significance of the declaration, saying it would have no practical effect.

Maori Party MP Hone Harawira told Radio New Zealand this morning the declaration would be used by Maori to bolster claims before the Waitangi Tribunal and in courts.

ACT leader Rodney Hide said it set up separate rights for Maori.

“The fact that the Government has ratified this is a big deal because people will be looking to this UN declaration for guidance… The signing up to this I believe is a breach of National Party to their core philosophy and their voters.”

Ms Chen told the broadcaster that the declaration did have meaning or the UN would not have spent 20 years pursuing it.

“Declarations are often a precursor to conventions… We’re on the first step. I understand what everyone said about aspiration etc but I do worry the legal advice seems to have changed.”

Some states signed up while making it clear they would not follow through, but that was not acting in good faith.

“New Zealand has to be a global citizen, we’ve always been a law taker not a law maker, we’re too small and that is the evolving international consensus, the evolving international customary law on indigenous people we do need to have some cognisance of it.”

Domestically the declaration would also have an impact.

“Declarations, never-the-less, are international obligations and they do form part of the backdrop, the context within which courts do interpret, but it’s not just courts its the Waitangi Tribunal and its also direct negotiations.”

Ms Chen said in 2007 the then Labour Government decided not to affirm the declaration based on Crown Law advice, over concerns the whole country would be caught in the scope of the declaration.

“They talked about the provisions on redress and compensation, again the entire country would appear to fall within the scope of the article, and the text generally takes no account of the fact that the land might be occupied or owned legitimately by others.”

Ms Chen said the declaration would “shape” Maori expectations in negotiations.

MAORI PARTY DUPED – GOFF

Prime Minister John Key played down the significance of the declaration, saying it would have no practical effect, while the Maori Party claimed it as an international success.

Labour leader Phil Goff said the Government was saying one thing to the Maori Party and another to everyone else.

“I think Pita Sharples has been duped,” he said.

“He’s been told this is something that really does count, at the very time John Key is saying it’s meaningless and counts for nothing.”

Mr Goff said Mr Hide’s attack was a serious matter for the Government.

“What we’re seeing is the impossibility of balancing the interests of the ACT Party, the Maori Party and the National Party,” he said.

“The National Party doesn’t believe this makes any difference…they’ve done this to buy the support of the Maori Party and they did it in secret.”

====================================================================

OK, so if the Seabed and Foreshore repeal is the pay off for supporting National on the G.S.T. rise, which it is, then this is the pay off for allowing Mining of DoC land.

John Key kept this from the people so it was a done deal when we found out, that is abusing the democratic process! The people could not have a say if they found out AFTER the document was signed. John Key is guilty of abusing the democratic process for political gain.

And he said it wouldn’t matter, that its non binding, this story says otherwise. Maybe John Key should stop telling lies and STOP MAKING DEALS WHICH SELLS OUT ALL OF NEW ZEALAND!

Next time John Key has an unpopular law to pass, what will he decide to sell next to the Maori party? Their own state? Their own justice system?

Sure, M.M.P. is all about compromise, BUT NOT AT THE COST SELLING OUT ALL CITIZENS OF THIS NATION! How much will this cost us in the long run? This U.N. document could be used by Hone “the racist” to declare that Maori will own the seabed and foreshore IF it is placed into the public domain, if no one owns it, then Maori will not need to consult with the Government on it, because that U.N. document Pita Sharples will make it so much easier.

John Key has made far too many deals since taking office. He sold out the parents of New Zealand by making a secret deal with the Greens NOT TO REPEAL THE ANTI SMACKING LAW (except if the law dictated it) no matter what FOR THEIR SUPPORT….. it was one of the last things Sue Bradford managed to negotiate before she resigned form the House.

And lets face it, ACT is not suffering, they got their investigation into taxation… with the result that the wealthy are to get a tax cut and the people a rise in GST.

Sam Morgan has already confirmed what some of us knew already… that the wealthy do NOT pay tax, and GST…. there’s ways around that as well, they get refunds…

Has National done ANYTHING to close those loopholes? YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING! The wealthy are still be paid the “working for families benefit” even though John Key said that would be fixed last November.

So, John Key is selling us out… to make the wealthy much more wealthier, the poor poorer, and the minor parties, some who are on the brink of the margin or error in the polls, are reaping benefits worth much more than the few seats they have in Parliament.

I have said in the past that NONE OF THE BASTARDS ARE WORTH VOTING FOR…. but if an election were held now, I reckon I’d vote for labour and SCREW THE MINOR PARTIES!

To John Key, STOP SELLING OUR NATION TO THE “MINOR” PARTIES AND THE WEALTHY!

nuff said.

So, the people who Telecom have been milking for years, mobile users, abandoned them for greener pastures, other networks with WORKING servers. So, now profits are down.

The people who will pay the most are middle management. 200 job losses were recently announced to save money… no, wait, the reality is that Telecom was always making a profit… just not as much now as they used to.

The job cuts are because profits are down… so people lose their jobs so stock holders, wealthy people in some cases, do not have to suffer with a less than expected dividend payment to shareholders.

Is this rampant greed or common capitalism?

In some ways, this is very similar to Bill English wanting to raise G.S.T. so the wealthy can get a tax cut. In both cases, it may not be illegal but its certainly immoral.

These workers have been loyal to the company and now, they are stabbed in the back by Telecom who will make them redundant so the shareholders do not have to suffer. Where is the loyalty Telecom should show to the workers?

Maybe a history lesson is called for here. Back in the 1800′s on the West coast of New Zealands South Island, a wealthy man owned a coal mine. He announced to his workers that they would have to take a pay cut because profits were down… he wasn’t making a loss… he was still making money, just not as much as the previous year. PROFITS WERE DOWN, so the workers had to take a pay cut, they had no option, take a cut of take a hike.

Maybe he wanted his workers to keep him and his family enjoying the millionaires lifestyle he had become accustomed to? Who knows, but the workers did not take this lying down at all, they formed a Union…

It was New Zealands first Union. Ultimately, it also saw the birth of the New Zealand Labour Party.

The rest is history, as they say.

Ever since that day when the workers fought back with the one weapon they had, their labour, the National Government has been doing its best to destroy the unions in New Zealand.

OK, maybe they did get power mad… but overall, if it were not for the unions, we would have no labour laws, we wouldn’t have the forty hour working week… even if National did its best to destroy those laws.

If Telecom is going to start acting like that Mine owner, and National is going to do its best to keep the workers down, then expect some very bad fire works soon. Telecom will not be the last company to make workers redundant for the shareholders sake, and sooner of later, the workers will want to fight back.

Keep in mind also, that National is doing its best to turn the nation against anyone on a benefit. many people on benefits, the vast majority in fact, are law abiding citizens, but Paula Bennet has already blamed EVERYONE on a benefit for the crime statistics.

Maybe she doesn’t read the newspapers… Hey Paula, how many EX NATIONAL PARTY Cabinet Ministers are appearing in Court on various charges right now? THREE…. THREE OF THEM… Are they getting a benefit?

If the Government wants people to save for their retirement, then its going to fail, because TWO of those ex-Ministers were part of a Finance Company that went bust… how many people lost their life savings? Their retirement funds?

Anyhow, this Government, as well as Telecom, are starting to show their true colours. Maybe its irony, but maybe some in this Government are related to that Coal Mine owner because they are so eager to allow mining on DoC land…

Is it any wonder that John Key’s Government has ended its honeymoon period with the voters. The more they trot out capitalist policies to benefit the wealthy, the lower they will sink in the Polls. Is it any wonder that people are again leaving New Zealand vowing never to return.

There is a warning in there for John Key, I wonder if he cares?

National

Critics of secretive international negotiations on the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Acta) have handed their “Wellington Declaration” to New Zealand negotiators.

The four-page document was accompanied by a petition signed by more than 6000 people from around the world scathing of a lack of transparency in the Wellington negotiations so far, lobbyist Internet New Zealand said in a statement today.

The Acta trade deal is planned to set a new benchmark for enforcement of intellectual property rights but critics of the secrecy have argued it will infringe on digital rights and impose draconian rules aimed largely at protecting the interests of copyright holders such as movies and music companies.

A “PublicActa” lobby met in Wellington at the weekend to issue a declaration aimed at protecting online freedom and the rights of internet users.

Its declaration said Acta should be limited to counterfeiting (the large scale commercial production of illicit physical goods).

It says the negotiating process should be more transparent, consistent with existing agreements and organisations such as the World Intellectual Property Organisation and less US-centric.

Delegations from 37 countries – including the United States, Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Korea, Mexico and Switzerland – are still meeting in Wellington to sort out how to help regulate copyright breaches.

The trade agreement is expected to include a “three strikes” policy, requiring internet service providers to block people who repeatedly breach copyrights.

Internet NZ policy director Jordan Carter said public efforts to make the negotiations more public had demonstrated an expectation of openness in international negotiations and the grassroots support for an open and “uncaptureable” Internet.

“On a global scale the Internet is ever-more critical to people’s communication and expression, and they don’t like it tampered with,” he said.

He said the Wellington Declaration has been translated into a number of languages and circulated around the world.

“We’ve lodged the Wellington Declaration with the New Zealand negotiators but it has also gathered a life of its own globally and the online petition carries on,” said Mr Carter.

The Library and Information Association of New Zealand said today that one of the principal purposes of copyright law was to encourage the dissemination and sharing of information, and it was strongly opposed to any measures which inhibited these things.

“Acta is a trade agreement being negotiated in secret,” the association said in a statement.

Any agreement relating to intellectual property should be negotiated openly and transparently, so that all potential stakeholders had a chance to have a say, it said.

=================================================================

Do you get the feeling that things around New Zealand are starting to resemble the former Soviet Union? Well, you would probably be justified in thinking that.

I have always said that the Western nations have clamped down on freedoms and democracy since the fall of the Soviet Union, this process has sped up since the World Trade Center attacks in 2001, mainly because now they (the politicians of the world) have an excuse, you lose a freedom, you protest, they say they only want to keep you safe from terrorists… if you complain too much, you get labeled a “Osama Lover” and get yelled down.

“But”, I hear you say, this has nothing to do with censorship or a loss of a freedom… but it does. Do you really think any Government will stop at piracy with this “three strikes policy”?

God knows how many websites the Justice Department has hacked after orders came from up high.

Lets say you were a protester speaking out about Japanese Whaling, and the Japanese Prime Minister was to come here for trade talks, so you posted a piece on your blog about how corrupt they were by manipulating the international laws concerning whaling.

Not only would they hack your website, but they could cut you off the internet. They would claim to the media that you were a pirate, but privately, they would justify their actions as being for the good of the nation, New Zealand depends on trade after all.

Could that happen? To quote Sarah Palin “you betcha!”

It has happened before. I will happen again.

This is why we have the S.I.S. and other “secret” agencies… the Police are heavily involved as well. Who remembers the “anti terror raids”which took place a short time ago here in New Zealand.

It was alleged that Tama Iti was planning his own terror raids…. but then, why did the Police also raid certaion protest groups as well? They walked off with boxes and boxes of documents, and then had to hand them back when the raids were not going to proceed.

No doubt, the Police photocopied all the documents.

Anti terror laws used to raid protest groups? Wow, who would have ever thought that sort of thing would ever happen here?

These “meetings” are being held in secret… why? Why are we, the people, being kept in the dark? These people are not elected politicians… who said they could dictate our laws?

Exactly who voted for these people? NO ONE!

The best thing this National Government can do now is abandon that conference and renounce this anti freedom law.

nuff said.

kgb

Schools to look into undercover bully-watch
(I knew I should have registered the “watch” name as a trademark…. Kiwi)
By JOHN HARTEVELT – Sunday Star Times

Last updated 05:00 11/04/2010

CHILDREN’S AGGRESSIVE behaviour will be monitored and measured in all of the nation’s 2370 schools, if a new government proposal to curb the growing incidence of bullying goes ahead.

The plan is still in the early stages, but it is understood that the Ministry of Education, police and the Children’s Commissioner will seek tenders for a system to monitor aggression and bullying in every school.

The suggestion comes after Children’s Commissioner Dr John Angus last week issued a new guide – called “Responsive Schools” – on how to combat increasing levels of physical, verbal, emotional and technological bullying. Among the recommended techniques is a system that recruits students to secretly work “undercover” in their school, alongside a teacher, to fight bullying.

The government has already started a $45 million campaign to bring schoolyard misbehaviour under control. The “Positive Behaviour for Learning Action Plan” includes parenting programmes for 12,000 parents, specific training for 5000 teachers of children aged three to eight, and long-term help programmes for 400 secondary and intermediate schools with the worst behaviour problems.

But the Sunday Star-Times has learned that another tool, to monitor violence and students’ fears in school, is being planned. Angus said the new scheme would allow teachers and parents to “understand the social climate in their school”.

Education Minister Anne Tolley confirmed work was under way on the scheme. It was being put together by the Ministry of Education, police and the Children’s Commissioner.

It is understood the new tool will work like a student survey, where pupils report regularly on how comfortable and safe they are at school. The data will be collected so that school leaders can quickly identify a deterioration in a school’s climate and spot problem areas. Similar surveys have been carried out in the past by groups such as the New Zealand Council for Educational Research but only in a one-off, snapshot format. The new tool would eventually work in every school, all of the time.

When victims felt safe reporting incidents, and where there was systematic gathering of information on the frequency of bullying, programmes were more likely to succeed, Tolley said.

Angus’ “Responsive Schools” report lists scores of different anti-bullying programmes in use around New Zealand but warns that whichever one a school chooses, a community-wide change of culture must go along with it.

Among the anti-bullying techniques commended in the report is one where students work “undercover” to cut bullying. Three or four pupils who are neither victims nor bullies are asked to join an “undercover team” along with one or two bullies.

Teachers, the victim of the bullies, and the other team members know of its existence, but no one else does. The team comes up with a plan together to help the victim and progress is communicated to the teacher regularly – often via email. The approach, pioneered at Auckland’s Rosehill College, is commended in the report. “The sense of intrigue makes the setting up of the undercover team into a playful approach,” it says.

Principal of Auckland’s Papatoetoe High School, Peter Gall, said the majority of schools would have some sort of anti-bullying programme in place by now. “It’s a matter of treating every situation seriously. You have to, because if you don’t it can come back to bite you.” Some people thought bullies would grow out of it and that some children were just “life’s victims” but that was nonsense, he said. “It’s all very well until it’s your child that’s bullied – then things change quite rapidly.”

=============================================================================================

Tony Ryall has his own name and shame site… and now, a similar thing for bullies??????

I hope the Government remembers that it all started with CYFSwatch, so why are they so hell bent on closing us down?????