I’m proud to live in a country that has a welfare system that provides for the less fortunate among us. I’ve met some genuine and wonderful people who suffer from debilitating injuries or illness. Some are on sickness or invalids benefits, others on ACC. I’ve met others who have temporarily found themselves on hard-times and needed a bit of a hand-up to get back on their feet. The unemployment benefit and other allowances available through Work and Income have helped them out.
I think it’s great that collectively we make sure that our fellow citizens get a fair go in life. I think it’s great that we look out for the more vulnerable among us. And that’s all the more reason why I get really hacked off with the small minority who abuse the system.
There is a story on Stuff today of a woman who, after being turned down for a benefit, paid for a huge billboard in Auckland to slag off Work and Income. She took exception to Work and Income claiming she had other means to support herself - and then proved them right by splashing out on the billboard. I mean, seriously!
The small number of people who abuse the welfare system in this country undermine it. Those who genuinely need help get tarred with the same brush and I think that stinks. I’m also worried that the National government will use cases like this to launch a new assault on our welfare system. In the end it won’t be the bludgers that get done over, it will be those in genuine need.
Thank you A mother
A Journalist from Radio New Zealand rang me and told me the news,I nearly cried. One of the other mothers said after hearing the news ” that she could have her daughter home now” I cried.
Updated at 7:38pm on 8 January 2010
The Human Rights Review Tribunal has found that the Ministry of Health discriminated against a group of parents looking after severely disabled adult children.
Accdording to the system operated by the ministry, it pays carers to look after severely disabled people – but if the carer happens to be a family member, they are not eligible for the payment.
A group of nine parents and their children took legal action against the ministry on the grounds that they were not allowed to be paid for the services they provided to their child, yet anyone else providing the very same care to the same child was able to be paid.
In a landmark decision, the tribunal has found in the parents’ favour.
The Chief Human Rights Commissioner, Rosslyn Noonan, is calling on the Government to pay them immediately.
A Government spokesperson says it’s likely the decision will be appealed. The ministry has 30 days to decide whether or not to do that.
Copyright © 2010 Radio New Zealand
I hope they don’t appeal. Its great news however. One giant step forward.
‘One of the other mothers said after hearing the news ” that she could have her daughter home now” Thats making me teary eyed.
I can’t even being to envision how hard it would be but not to be able to be the one to care for them at all would, I imagine would be even harder.
Congratulations.
I suppose the old saying “only A mother understands” comes true here.
It would be now a great time to hear the voices of Labour MPs on this issue. It is no longer before the Tribunal, a decision has been made.
Regards Peter
That’s great
In most cases the family member is a better carer than a stranger.
This may give you more idea what the case was about an its implications.
http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/labour-defends-stance-over-adult-carers-3326990/video
Regards Peter
The responce from Labour
Meanwhile Labour is defending its stance in what has been found to be discrimination against a group of parents.
The issue has been dragging on for 11 years and Labour’s health spokeswoman Ruth Dyson says when her party was in office it worked with a carers’ alliance to develop ways around the situation.
Dyson says payment of family members was an issue at the time but it wasn’t the most important one. She says the government now needs to find a way to decide what a family commitment is, and what should be done by outside support people.
Labour is calling on the Minister of Health to make a clear-cut decision on the issue. Dyson says in some cases family members can give better care than professionals.
Please watch this video http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/labour-defends-stance-over-adult-carers-3326990/video
The commissioner is talking about our treatment under you watch Ms dyson. You say that the payment to caregivers was not an important issue at the time. Please tell that to the Plantif that died, please tell that to the two plantifs who are over 70.
Your blurb on the Labour website reads as follows…. “She has been active in community and party politics for many years, particularly in the areas of social justice, environmental issues and human rights”
This is social justice, this is Human rights and you have acted on advice that has breached both.
The victory by parents to be paid for caring for their adult children with disabilities was a clear message that people can not be discriminated against because they are family.
It was a message to government that the social contract that families were perceived to be working under is no longer valid. The contract was that families should look after their adult disabled children until they could no longer physically or financially do it, this was to be done free of charge. The other alternative was to place your family member in the care of an agency and fully pay them to care for that person. If we were to apply this social contract to unemployed people, people who have dependant children or even superannuates how many families would be able to do this. One of the reasons we no longer apply this social contract to other areas like unemployment is because there has been strong advocacy by those affected and a political will to change this. The reason that it is still okay to hold on to this social contract in the disability issue is because firstly we as parents do not have the energy to fight for change. When you spend your days feeding, changing nappies, monitoring seizures, monitoring behaviors, and trying to financially keep your head above water, the energy to fight and change the bigger picture is just not there. The second reason being that the government is willing to exploit our love for our children.
Peter Humphreys
Agreed, the disabled person should have the best carer for them and that / those carer(s) should be paid. Often the best carer is a family member.
Thank you Spud. Maybe I need to put my daughter on a motorbike and travel the country to get a response from Labour MPs!!!
Maybe the neoliberalism ideology has come to fruition now and removed any Labour MP from truly empathizing or being able to a comment with out authority.
Regards Peter
http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/opinion/editorials/3219747/Editorial-Give-parents-some-support
I wouldn’t get too carried away about the carers case. Even if there’s no appeal and we’re left with the declaration of discrimination, there’s no guarantee the policy will change. If there’s no appeal on the discrimination point, there’ll be a separate hearing on remedy, which might include no requirement for government to cough up. Will need to wait and see, but at least there’s been the declaration – well done – no easy task in NZ.
Anton,
I think you are right. I have no doubt that the government will circumvent the decision.
The editorial in the Waikato Times alludes to the body blows that the government will suffer in the process. The stories of the quality of state care available as an alternative to that provided by parents is horrific. We as parents all had stories of a similar experience. I am sure that these stories will begin to unfold as this issue is dragged out. If this case does not achieve its objective of payment to families, hopefully it will highlight the diabolical state of government provided disability care in New Zealand. This will benefit all our children in the long term, as we will not always be here.
Regards Peter
That’s awful, those children deserve to be in a loving home, and not cared for by underpaid strangers.
This was Posted by Clare Curran on January 10th, 2010 on this site.
“Red Alert is part of our attempt to develop a more genuine relationship with people online. Many Labour MPs have facebook pages and are starting to use them more regularly. A few are on Twitter. But it’s not enough. We’re got a few more ideas for direct engagement with a broad audience via a mixture of face to face and online means”
I think the the most important thing that could happen on this site is for those contributing, to go by their given names,rather than non de plumes.
Regards Peter
Regardless of the remedy handed down in the carers case, one fanstastic outcome is that the declaration was granted despite the financial cost to government of fixing the discrepancy being estimated at around $30 to $60 million. The Tribunal rejected the ministry’s scare-mongering that’d be up to nearly $600 million, but while the $30 to $60 million has been described as “minimal” by Ros Noonan and others it’s still a significant sum and if the Tribunal had been made up of other certain members may well have been used to say the prima-facie discrimination was “justified” therefore there’s no discrimination at all. If it had said this it would’ve been wrong in law – under the legislation cost to government is clearly relevant to remedy not whether something’s discriminatory. It’s pleasing to see that the Tribunal didn’t fall into the the same trap that other members of the Tribunal have fallen into in previous decisions. Well done to those families.
Well, the government’s appealed the carers’ win at the Human Rights Review Tribunal. It’s really interesting when government introduces legislation to ensure “fairness” and “equality” etc, then when it’s applied government does everything it can to stop it.
Good on you Carmel – I really enjoyed this post! Nice and clear. And a really important topic. As a long time supporter, I do worry sometimes Labour seems obsessed with blogs and google and microsoft – good to see you focussed on the REAL world.