Election 2014: Mental Health Policies

11:15 Aug 28, 2014 53

by Kyle MacDonald

Health funding is tricky. Politically, it's often about robbing Peter to pay Paul, and my experience of working in the public mental health system for many years is that mental health is often the "black sheep" of the health system. In the past, for this reason, spending on mental health treatment has been "ring-fenced" and specific targets (like via the mental health "blueprint") have set up to ensure adequate funding and service provision.

It's also a tricky thing to know at what level health is actually being funded. It's one thing to say that funding for the health budget has been increased (as the National government claimed in this year's Budget) in dollar terms, it's a different question as to whether it has actually increased relative to population growth and demographic factors.

Much cleverer people than me are clear that his year's health budget was actually a relative cut in health spending of $232 million dollars. Analysis from the Green Party, conducted independently by economic consultants BERL, also concluded that the proposed budget outlined for the next three years by the National Government will continue to underfund our public health services, and therefore by default our public mental health services.

So if mental health is your interest, your profession, your life or your experience here's what the main parties have to say about what they will do with our health dollars. Where possible I've given the whole mental health policy (if there was one) from the party's website, and have also approached all the relevant health spokespeople (if there was one) for comment. At the time of publication, only Kevin Hague of the Green Party had replied.

National Party

The only policy I've been able to find on the National Party website relating to, or mentioning, mental health is as follows:

"Support young people with mental health issues to get the help they need, and improve services via the PM's Youth Mental Health Project." (Click here for more on this policy)

I also approached the Minister of Health, Hon. Tony Ryall, for comment and further details. He did not respond to my enquiries.

Let's not forget that it is this National led Government that has overseen the dismantling of the Family Court-funded access to couples counselling, attempted repeatedly (albeit unsuccessfully, but only due to massive protest) to severely limit access to the ACC sensitive claims counselling funding for victims of sexual violence and continued to tighten eligibility for what used to be called the Invalids Benefit and counselling funding provided by WINZ. Increased funding for young people with mental illness will do little to counterbalance these losses, in my view.

Labour Party

The Labour Health policy, on the other hand, is quite detailed and health spokesperson the Hon. Annette King, who I heard speak recently, is clear that mental health is a priority for the Labour Party.

From the Labour Health Policy 2014:

(Click here for the whole policy document)

"Mental health will be one of Labour's top eight health priorities when in Government. Labour will:

Acknowledge the importance of mental health by restoring it as a health priority for District Health Boards.

Require District Health Boards to set appropriate targets for the restoration and enhancement of mental health services.

Re-instate the ring-fence for mental health funding.

Enhance the provision of acute services to those most in need.

Work to ensure equity of access services to those most in need.

Work to ensure equity of access to health care for those experiencing mental illness.

Support early intervention programmes for those with mild to moderate mental health issues as a method of providing low cost access to services and reducing costs in the provision of secondary services.

Include good mental wellbeing as an objective of putting children at the centre of polcy making.

Support those experiencing lower acuity mental illness through to recovery and/ or self-management and encourage where desirable the transfer of ring fenced funding from hospital to community-based support arrangements.

Review the contracting arrangements for mental health providers with a view to creating more consistent and efficient approach to contracting.

Ensure that when community mental health contracts are tendered that priority is accorded to organisations transitioning to a living wage.

Provide increased resources to the office of the Health and Disability Commissioner to recognise the associated increased workload that has accompanied the trend towards growing interaction with mental health services.

Work with mental health consumers, mental health organisations, service providers, District Health Boards and the Department of Corrections to eliminate the avoidable use of seclusion and minimize the use of restraints in mental health facilities including psychiatric wards and "at risk units."

Acknowledge sexual violence as a major cause of mental health issues and work to address the consequences for this."

Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

The Green Party has a fairly comprehensive and detailed set of mental health policies:

(Click here for the full policy document)

"The Green Party will:

Ensure mental healthcare training and practice is grounded in holistic, humanistic perspectives that recognise each individual as whole.

Encourage mental health providers working within multi-disciplinary teams that hold the well-being of the client at the heart of their practice. Wherever possible, clients have a ‘primary’ provider who remains with them through their recovery process.

Ensure skilled facilitation of multi-disciplinary teams that enables collaborative ways of working and provides collegial and professional support.

Utilise client-assessed outcome measurement tools to compare service effectiveness.

Fund innovative initiatives based on overseas experiences or new initiatives, particularly those that indicate high recovery rates with low/minimal drug use."

I also spoke briefly with Kevin Hague, Health spokesperson for the Green Party, and he outlined the following for me, in response to questions.

Firstly about Labour's policy of re-introducing the ringfence approach to funding for mental health:

"I do favour resuming the ringfence, but it has to go hand in hand with forcing DHBs to actually meet blueprint volumes. Broadly our policy and Labour's are congruent."

And with regards to the Green Party's priorities for mental health spending he had this to say...

"My top priorities (within mental health services - of course our wider social and economic policies will make a significant difference) would be:

"1. restoring a funding path to services (including NGOs) that matches the need services are trying to meet (in contrast to current real terms cuts over past 6 years)
2. Ensuring good access to counseling, brief interventions and other treatment as part of the primary care level, but either directly or through PHOs
3. Ensure full range of community-based support services for people with ongoing mental illness, including residential services, so they don't get stuck in inpatient units (or left unsupported)
4. develop some indicators for service quality in mental health that align with best practice and will require systemic improvement to achieve
5. AOD services ramped up, especially (and in conjunction with other mental health treatment services) for Corrections clients"

United Future

When I heard the Hon. Peter Dunne speak to this policy, he was clear to differentiate that it represented United Future policy, and that as such he was not speaking as Associate Health Minister:

(Click here for the full policy document)

"United Future will:

Encourage government agencies to work together on early intervention, prevention, treatment and rehabilitation in mental health

Ensure that the right balance is struck between inpatient and community care to prevent people becoming a danger to themselves and society, but with recovery within the community remaining the goal

Increase resources for mental health professionals to ensure that those patients who may pose a risk to others or themselves are adequately assessed and treated

Increase the number of community-based mental health workers to ease high caseloads

Fund child and youth mental health inpatient beds at a level sufficient to achieve the objectives set out in Rising to the Challenge – the Mental Health and Addiction Service Development Plan 2012-2017 and the Prime Minister’s Youth Mental Health Project;

Tackle the issue of the lack of accommodation and employment support options for people recovering from mental health problems in the community;
Increase drug, alcohol and mental health treatment programmes for prison inmates

Improve workforce development and funding available for youth-focused counselling services as the first line of defence, rather than over-prescribing pharmaceuticals for mental health problems

Ensure DHBs plan for secure facilities for treatment of young people with mental health problems

Promote more research to address youth related health problems such as suicide, alcoholism, and bulimia"

New Zealand First

The New Zealand First Health policy outlines some broad goals, and I also approached the NZ First Health spokesperson Barbara Stewart with some questions about their specific policy. She didn't respond to my inquiries.

(Click here for the full policy outline)

"New Zealand First will:

Increase the options of mental health services available, working towards a community view instead of a medical view of services.

Improve residential services for people who have severe illnesses or disabilities and/or substance abuse problems.

Provide additional resourcing for child and youth mental health services, and the necessary resources and funding to address the continuing appalling state of mental health services by completing the full implementation of the recommendations of the Mason report."

Maori Party

Specific mental health policy appears a little thin on the ground, other than ongoing support for Whānau Ora, and more specifically supporting the Prime Minister's Youth mental health intitiative via targeted Whānau Ora funding.

(click here for more on this funding)

More generally:

"The Māori Party is committed to... ... inclusion of the 6 week GP check in Well Child/ Tamariki Ora services to ensure signs of postnatal depression and congenital heart disease are identified... [and] ...continued research and evaluation into the effectiveness of suicide prevention, intervention and postvention for whānau Māori."

Mana Party

(Click here for the full health policy outline)

"The Mana party will:

Increase access to and funding for mental health services, including those for children and young people.

Support the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes when made available under prescription from a health professional.

Give communities a veto over whether and where liquor outlets, fast food outlets, and pokie venues are established."

Internet Party

The Internet party has a very detailed policy document on the use of "E-Health" solutions, but very little else that I could find on health policy. The document doesn't refer directly to mental health.

ACT

ACT makes the following policy statement about health funding generally:

"ACT does not support free healthcare as this results in the provision of a service which is not valued."

Says it all really.

(Click here for more on their health policies)

Conservative Party

The Conservative Party makes the following statement about health:

"A belief that all New Zealanders should have reasonable access to quality health care and education regardless of their ability to pay."

(Click here for more on their "principles")

They make no specific statements about mental health, although I have previously expressed some concern about the party's lack of understanding in this area as indicated by the stigmatising use of language in their promotional material see: Off the Couch: Not mental.

So, what's the moral of the story? Well, it should hardly be a surprise that the minor parties on the right either explicitly don't support funding of mental health, or have very little to say about it. The other minor parties, largely on the left or centre-left, seem to support ongoing and increased mental health funding. Of the three major parties, the Labour Party and the Green Party have the most detailed and well-developed polices as to how to increase and make more effective the public mental health system.

And for those of you that think this is a minority issue, as I wrote about last week (see: Off the Couch: What is normal?) just under half of us will experience a mental illness or an addiction at some point in our life, and one in five Kiwis currently are. Make your vote count.

Kyle MacDonald is a psychotherapist and is the New Zealand Association of Psychotherapists Council spokesperson on Public Issues. He writes a regular blog “Off the Couch” at www.psychotherapy.org.nz and can be found on Twitter: @kylemacd

53 responses to this post

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Kyle MacDonald, 13:36 Aug 28, 2014

The following response from New Zealand First came through after this was posted:
"1. What are your parties priorities for mental health funding if you are returned to government?
New Zealand First would ensure resources and facilities are available for treatment. New Zealand First would also:
· Increase the options of mental health services available, working towards a community view instead of a medical view of services.
· Provide additional resourcing for child and youth mental health services, and the necessary resources and funding to address the continuing appalling state of mental health services by completing the full implementation of the recommendations of the Mason report.
· Increase the number of acute and non-acute beds and accommodation units for the mentally ill and modify the process of judicial review of decisions to release mentally ill patients into the community.
2. Do you support a return to ring-fence funding for mental health treatment as outlined in the Labour health policy?
New Zealand First would support ring fence funding for mental health."

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report
George Darroch, 13:37 Aug 28, 2014

Thanks Kyle, greatly appreciated.
I work in an addictions organisation, and contrary to ACT's statement, I know that the clients we work with value the free services they receive very much. I'm heartened by the promises of support and of increasing both the level and quality of service across the sector.
Just a minor note, I'd make clear above that AOD is a term which refers to "alcohol and other drugs".

WLG • Since Nov 2006 • 2264 posts Report
Russell Brown, in reply to George Darroch, 13:56 Aug 28, 2014

I work in an addictions organisation, and contrary to ACT’s statement, I know that the clients we work with value the free services they receive very much.
That was such a banal statement that responding to it almost amounts to unduly dignifying it. But yeah.

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report
Carol Stewart, 14:14 Aug 28, 2014

Thanks Kyle, that's a really useful summary.

Wellington • Since Jul 2008 • 830 posts Report
Grant Taylor, 15:42 Aug 28, 2014

Valuable post, Kyle, thanks. As a former mental health professional careerist (Clinical Psychologist, once upon a time), I am only too familiar with the relative neglect of mental health both politically and by the health administration - but I think this just reflects our society's general discomfort with mental health issues. I have seen many individuals and systems within the mental health sector display this discomfort just as strongly as those outside of it!
My experience in the days of ring-fenced mental health budgets does not make me enthusiastic about their return. The distinction between mental and physical health is a largely spurious one and a social construct that I think does more harm than good - e.g the 'mentally ill' have tended to get comparatively poor physical health care and the psychosocial causes of many 'physical health' problems are often missed or actively avoided because no-one involved wants to face them or knows how to deal with them. Providing a(nother) structure reifying this spurious and unhelpful distinction is not good policy, in my view.

Auckland • Since Jul 2012 • 24 posts Report
Kyle MacDonald, in reply to Grant Taylor, 20:28 Aug 28, 2014

I'm inclined to agree, at least at a political and sociological level. But practically, unless health budgets are fully and adequately funded, then I suspect health boards will internally be inclined to underfund mental health, at the cost of achieving other health targets. In this light I can't see another solution, outside of ring-fencing, but I'm open to suggestion!

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report
Kyle MacDonald, in reply to , 23:12 Aug 28, 2014

So the low wage sector in mental health is largely the care work provided to the chronically and long term mentally ill, what is loosely described as "supported accommodation."
Largely this is conducted by NGO's and this is a worthwhile policy in my view as it forces NGO's to not compete contracts by reducing staff wages.

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report
Craig Young, 09:30 Aug 29, 2014

I gritted my teeth, held my nose and read a puff piece by Ian Wishart interviewing Colin Craig for Investigate earlier this year. Anyway, CC stated that he thought public health expenditure should be diverted partially to alternative and complementary "medicine" and "remedies" like chiropractics, homeopathy and also opposes fluoridation. What one would expect, unfortunately :/

Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report
Marc C, 22:37 Aug 29, 2014

Thanks for the information in this post, showing mental health policy various parties have. I am not that surprised that Tony Ryall has not provided much information, and what National and their present government have been doing is not very convincing. It appears that mental health treatment and support has only been improved for certain target groups, like prison inmates and youth, and that it has otherwise been somewhat neglected, because figures for more elective surgery look “better” to the majority in the public.
I know enough persons who have suffered and are suffering from mental health conditions, and I have seen lives wasted, because of lack of support for them. Also have I at a time in my life used some mental health services myself, to overcome some personal challenges.
Besides of the government's talk about increased health funding (nominal, not so much per capita), there has been a tight cap on funding for mental health, in some areas a cut in real terms. For instance until a couple of years ago Procare Psychological Services here in Auckland were offering up to 5 free sessions with a counsellor (psychologist or so), as they received subsidies to do so for short term interventions. After that they suddenly had to reduce the sessions that were subsidised to 4, and for those 4 the persons using them had to make a minimum fee payment of 25 dollars or so, as the subsidies were no longer sufficient to fund that service.
Community Mental Health services offered by the DHB in Auckland are now turning away more people by telling them to seek treatment "in the community", as they only focus on high risk and serious cases. So people have to go around and try to find counselling somewhere else, costing hefty fees. While WINZ may pay for unemployed or low income people, they often do not cover the whole costs.
I have heard about CADS (Community Alcohol and Drug Services) struggling to maintain certain services, as they also have had limited funding, which does not meet the increased need they have experienced, not just due to population increase, but also due to increased awareness of addiction issues.
And so the list goes on, and I am sure there are other services around the country that have struggled to keep going, and to keep delivering services that are in increasing demand.
What really infuriated me was that the government did 2012/13 bring in "reforms" in social security and welfare (Social Development), which includes changes to medical and work ability assessments done by GPs and at times specialists, also WINZ's own "designated doctors" and now contracted private providers. More people with sickness and disability are not only "encouraged", but also pressured to look at work options and finding work on the job market, as doctors now rather look at "fitness" and "ability" of people with many conditions, than at their incapability or incapacity.
Many people on benefits due to health reasons suffer from mental health conditions, and one would have expected that the government would increase funding for treatment and support to actually try and help such persons get better and perhaps "fit" to work. Yet so far there is little indication of that happening, except perhaps for some youth, and most of extra funding is rather going into "intensive case management" by WINZ case managers and some private providers of new services, trying to place sick and disabled in work.
I read with some interest that Labour and Greens intend to spend more on mental health and want to ring fence spending in that area. I am also pleased to hear that Annette King and Labour want to increase spending on the HDC Office (Health and Disability Commissioner), as I have actually heard of them treating some people in a rather poor way, not bothering to investigate justified complaints. Indeed they need more funding, as last year they had over 1,600 complaints, of which only 60 or so were "formally" investigated.
As for the present welfare reforms and insufficient mental health and other treatments, and how the reforms potentially put people at risk, I recommend info available via 'nzsocialjusticeblog2013' (try Google or other search engine).

Auckland • Since Oct 2012 • 437 posts Report
Marc C, 23:08 Aug 29, 2014

Mental health is a delicate area of medicine, and some new research into conditions, and how they result varying degrees of disability, has both been supported by some and disputed by others.
Here are links to some info about "findings" by controversial Professor Mansel Aylward that were used as "evidence" to justify changes in medical and work ability assessments, as part of welfare reforms by this government. Some posts are also about how MSD (the Ministry of Social Development) has under this government changed their approaches and implemented a new regime, and how this may represent risks for the affected, many suffering mental health problems.
According to Aylward and some of his colleagues work is now considered the "best medicine" to get well from illness and various mental health conditions. They conducted their research at the ‘Centre for Psychosocial and Disability Research’ at Cardiff University, Wales, which was for many years "sponsored" by equally controversial health and disability insurer UNUM Provident. It is worth noting too, that UNUM's US insurance branch was actually convicted for fraudulent abuse of medical assessments to deny insured rightful insurance claims. Here in New Zealand there was also much controversy about ACC's "exit strategy" for complex, costly claims cases. It can be said that in at least some cases ACC used similar methods as UNUM did in the US.
This is what the AFOEM and the medical profession now promote and propagate:
http://www.racp.org.nz/page/afoem-health-benefits-of-work
http://www.racp.org.nz/page/racp-faculties/australasian-faculty-of-occupational-and-environmental-medicine/realising-the-health-benefits-of-work/may-2010-video-presentation-professor-sir-mansel-aylward/
The following posts express criticism of MSD's and WINZ's new approach, based on what was tried and done in the UK:
http://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/medical-and-work-capability-assessments-based-on-the-controversial-bio-psycho-social-model/
http://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2014/06/21/work-ability-assessments-done-for-work-and-income-a-revealing-fact-study-part-a/
http://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2014/06/22/work-ability-assessments-done-for-work-and-income-a-revealing-fact-study-part-d/
http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/15188-medical-and-work-capability-assessments-based-on-the-bps-model-aimed-at-disentiteling-affected-from-welfare-benefits-and-acc-compo/
http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/15463-designated-doctors-%e2%80%93-used-by-work-and-income-some-also-used-by-acc/
http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/16092-work-ability-assessments-done-for-work-and-income-%E2%80%93-partly-following-acc%E2%80%99s-approach-a-revealing-fact-study/
http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/15264-welfare-reform-the-health-and-disability-panel-msd-the-truth-behind-the-agenda/
http://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/files/library/THE-HIDDEN-AGENDA-a-research-summary-March-2013.pdf
Perhaps more real support is needed, in treatment, and in after care support, and certainly mentally ill should be involved in a very respectful, understanding way, rather than try and apply pressures, to save costs by whatever means.
I personally think a change of government may offer opportunities to do a better job in future.

Auckland • Since Oct 2012 • 437 posts Report
Marc C, 14:44 Sep 1, 2014

Shocking news from Ashburton today, about a shooting in a WINZ Office there, may just sadly underscore that mental health policies and funding must be given absolute priority in New Zealand health policy. I heard the reports via the radio and at lunchtime I saw the TV news coverage, and at first I was in disbelief. But soon my mind moved to what I learned over the last two years, and I must admit, I feared some bad things may happen sooner or later.
This does also raise VERY SERIOUS questions about how WINZ handles certain cases! I was rather expecting that some people may resort to self harm, as has happened in many cases in the UK, where ruthless welfare reforms were pursued, and have only been partially reviewed more recently. Putting immense pressures on now even sick and disabled, to look for work, to do other things that especially mentally ill may struggle with, is creating a very dangerous environment, which can lead to unforeseen events.
While I will not jump to conclusions, I do strongly suspect that in this incident mental health issues were involved in the case of the person who is alleged to have now killed two WINZ workers, and injured another one seriously. Of course there is no justification for such actions, and the matter will be dealt with by police and other authorities. It is of great concern, at what risk front line staff at WINZ are being put, by flawed welfare policy they now push in every WINZ Office, and which staff have to deliver on.
Here is the latest news from 'The Press':
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/10446236/Two-dead-in-Work-and-Income-shooting
I am a bit critical about what Sue Bradford apparently tweeted, but on the other hand, I do agree with her previous criticism of the "welfare reforms" this government has forced upon tens of thousands of sick and disabled, facing re-assessments, where mental health conditions may not be taken serious enough by some assessors now, as they are told by MSD and the government, to rather look at what people supposedly "can do", than what impairments they have. Are we in some ways repeating the mistakes made in the UK? I fear we are, as there is little indication that MSD and WINZ have changed direction, and have their "designated doctors" and now also separate "work ability assessors" take a more principled and considerate approach.
I can only refer readers here to links in my comments above, to read and try to understand what is going on in New Zealand. For Paula Bennett, the main pusher behind all this, to now go to Ashburton to attend to the drama, that raises many questions in me.
This is an article critical of what Sue Bradford commented:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10446861/Bradford-shooting-tweet-sparks-backlash
It is time to take mental health issues in this society damned more serious, I say!

Auckland • Since Oct 2012 • 437 posts Report
Ian Dalziel, in reply to Marc C, 15:20 Sep 1, 2014

Herald has the recent background stories as well...

Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7953 posts Report
Angela Hart, in reply to Marc C, 15:34 Sep 1, 2014

Yes, mental health issues need to be taken seriously, along with other issues which make people vulnerable and people need to be treated with respect and compassion. Sue is correct in pointing out that current government policies are likely to cause terrible stress in some people who see nowhere else to turn. It doesn't excuse violent reaction but we should be asking why these things happen. There is a list here http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11317363

Christchurch • Since Apr 2014 • 614 posts Report
Kumara Republic, 16:03 Sep 1, 2014

I have an uncomfortable inkling that John Tully is just the tip of the iceberg.

The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5446 posts Report
Paul Williams, in reply to Marc C, 16:26 Sep 1, 2014

I am a bit critical about what Sue Bradford apparently tweeted, but on the other hand, I do agree with her previous criticism of the “welfare reforms” this government has forced upon tens of thousands of sick and disabled, facing re-assessments, where mental health conditions may not be taken serious enough by some assessors now, as they are told by MSD and the government, to rather look at what people supposedly “can do”, than what impairments they have.
I'm not really well placed to comment on the 'appropriateness' of Bradford's tweet other than to note she is an individual with enormous personal and professional experience dealing with mental health and not someone that anyone could accuse of jumping on a bandwagon.

Sydney • Since Nov 2006 • 2273 posts Report
Kyle MacDonald, 16:31 Sep 1, 2014

I am very critical of what she (Sue Bradford) tweeted. The tragic death of two innocent individuals shouldn't be politicised, at least not with in hours of the death. There will be plenty of time for a post-mortem and analysis. Now is not that time. To her credit she has since posted an apology, stating she was not yet aware at the time of tweeting, that two people were dead.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11317384

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report
Marc C, in reply to Kyle MacDonald, 17:21 Sep 1, 2014

She later apologised, I understand, and she claimed that at the time she made the controversial tweet, she did not know the full details and that two persons had been killed.
Condolences must go to the work colleagues, family members and friends of the victims.
Yes, it is wrong to "politicise" such tragic events, but questions must be asked, and hopefully will be asked and answered later, to shed light on what is behind of all this.
In the end, everything we do and say is somehow "political". That applies also to what government departments may be expected to do and deliver, as expected from a government.
That does not mean though that people do "exploit" such a drama, by raising valid questions.
So let us first give time for all to cope and deal with the immediate harm and consequences, and hope that the person responsible will soon be found and taken into custody and care, to avoid further harm. I really hope that there will not be further fatalities.

Auckland • Since Oct 2012 • 437 posts Report
tussock, 21:24 Sep 1, 2014

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11317351
A recent history of the man in question. Homeless on disability in Ashburton, a month sleeping rough with failing joints, only at WINZ in the first place because those on disability have to seek work now, like the shiftless lazy bastards we all know they are, only out of a home because privatising state houses is hilariously profitable and building them is a private sector matter.
But of course, there's no DPS for the staff at WINZ. The front line that National cares so much about. Can't politicise it? How is that not political? The man was asking for help from MPs for over a month, in the fucking southern winter, with stuffed joints.

Did I mention in another thread here how people were angry at the punitive shit this government puts on our poorest?

Since Nov 2006 • 611 posts Report
Kumara Republic, 21:28 Sep 1, 2014

Here's a thought: what if there were thousands of John Tullys, instead of just one? Chances are the symptom will be attacked and not much more. A bit like Ferguson, Missouri.

The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5446 posts Report
Ian Dalziel, 06:52 Sep 2, 2014

One paragraph at the end of the Ashburton shooting story on The Press front page today caught my eye.
Social Development Minister Paula Bennett, who flew to Ashburton yesterday, said Tully tried to email her.
'Tried'?
She either got an email or she didn't,
how would she know if he had only tried...?
a new way to say nothing...
Can't find that story on line yet but RNZ has this:
story
which shows Bennett wass CC'ed on some emails
Shooter may have asked Government minister for help
A spokesperson for New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said Russell John Tully emailed the party on 14 August about the difficulty he was having trying to find somewhere to live.
The spokesperson said Mr Tully also wrote to the local member of Parliament, National MP Jo Goodhew.
She said the email showed he also contacted Social Development Minister, Paula Bennett, the office of the Speaker, and Transport and Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee.
The spokesperson said New Zealand First replied to Mr Tully immediately but the emails kept bouncing back.
Ms Goodhew said while Mr Tully approached her office about getting a house, she had never met him.

Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7953 posts Report
Jeremy Andrew, 08:26 Sep 2, 2014

“The personal, as everyone’s so fucking fond of saying, is political. So if some idiot politician, some power player, tries to execute policies that harm you or those you care about, take it personally. Get angry. The Machinery of Justice will not serve you here – it is slow and cold, and it is theirs, hardware and soft-. Only the little people suffer at the hands of Justice; the creatures of power slide from under it with a wink and a grin. If you want justice, you will have to claw it from them. Make it personal. Do as much damage as you can. Get your message across. That way, you stand a better chance of being taken seriously next time. Of being considered dangerous. And make no mistake about this: being taken seriously, being considered dangerous marks the difference - the only difference in their eyes - between players and little people. Players they will make deals with. Little people they liquidate. And time and again they cream your liquidation, your displacement, your torture and brutal execution with the ultimate insult that it’s just business, it’s politics, it’s the way of the world, it’s a tough life and that it’s nothing personal. Well, fuck them. Make it personal.”
― Richard K. Morgan, Altered Carbon

Hamiltron - City of the F… • Since Nov 2006 • 900 posts Report
Kyle MacDonald, 08:39 Sep 2, 2014

To clarify: I have no doubt that the tragic events in Ashburton are Political. However I continue to feel uncomfortable about how when we politicise, we loose sight of the individuals involved. The WINZ staff are not political figures and their families should be given space to grieve. Some comments (not here so much) have tended towards forgiving or even encouraging violence. This is a tragedy from every angle and I believe we need to keep our heads, and our humanity.

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report
Kyle MacDonald, 09:23 Sep 2, 2014

Yes: I suspect we actually agree with each other.

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report
Kyle MacDonald, in reply to , 09:32 Sep 2, 2014

Thanks, I think. It can be both of course. He was angry and this is a horrible criminal act. It's also true he was poorly treated by a political system. But he's not alone in that AND not all mis-treated by WINZ kill.

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report
Kyle MacDonald, 11:17 Sep 2, 2014

Great interview on Nine to Noon today about the very real effects of the cuts in DHB funding for mental health, and the risk we may lose a very effective service in Golden Bay, Te Whare Mahana...
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/20148046/community-mental-health-providers-under-pressure

Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report