Access by Various artists

Thanks for this Wendi

Yes. All I can say is "I'll keep trying to do better next time". I wasn't involved in the event(s) you were at, to be clear, but I appreciate the reminder.

The problem lies with the organisers. Having been involved in past years with this type of event, I'm well aware of a brand of organiser who wants to use such occasions as a networking opportunity for their personal growth. And it's not just a Wellington thing.

I'm the mardy cow that questions marking an event with a fancy $100 a plate dinner and a paid speaker. What about those women who can't afford $100, but were nontheless part of the women's movement or event that we are commemorating, I ask, and the answer is a shrug and a change of subject.

Frankly, it makes them uncomfortable to mix with women who are not conspicuously successful. So ask yourself, what can a woman without power, influence or cash do to further the careers of the organisers? Or an old woman in a wheelchair (like me), who is unlikely to have the friends in high places the organisers want to be introduced to? (But they might be surprised.)
This is their unspoken reasoning, and I get it.

All that can be done in the absence of co-operation is to shriek, publicise and name and shame. Before the event if possible, but any time will do. Anything less than full shriek doesn't seem to get through. Hullabaloo is your friend.

So take up that invitation from the MWA, go with some allies of similar views, and lay it on whatever junior poli-ana they front up with. Be prepared with a few stats and examples, to make it real. Leave something (a planning checklist? a timetable for action?) they can base planning on, and ask to be notified of follow up.

Hah!
Hands up those who have been asked by organisers of such events...

"What can we do to make sure you can participate fully?"

Thought so.

Great post Wendi, thanks.

I have to say I could only wish it was only due to the organisers and it was the first time they'd ever heard of the issue. It's quite true, they do constitute a substantial part of the problem/solution. But they are only part of it, and focussing only on them lets all the other feminists off the hook.
You can be sure we'll be talking with WA though- plans have been hatched.

And BTW Wendi and Waterdragon are one and the same: I was having a fit of creativity at the time when I created the login

Pleased to hear you will take up the MWA invitation, and only wish I could join you, Wendi WaterDragon. Best of luck.
Maybe other government departments could be in attendance? Or even organise their own sessions?

Facebook, being what it is, I couldn't find your thread.

And I found out this yesterday. Whois search of NZDSN finds the charity Spectrum Care (they run Homes of Choice). A quick glance at the compulsory Related Parties disclosures of Spectrum Care accounts on the Charities website shows their 7 General Mangers get paid an average of $165,525 per year. My guess is that the top bod would get more. Some Trustees also have cross memberships on different charities. I didn't find out their fees.

Serious question, are they yet another bloated "philanthropy" organisation in the disability sector? Given what we've learned about Plunket in the last couple of days, this needs examining.

Hi Wendi, I cannot find your Facebook post you referred to When the video feed went up on Facebook, I posted some of what I did not say do you have a link, or did they delete it?

And I found out this yesterday. Whois search of NZDSN finds the charity Spectrum Care (they run Homes of Choice). A quick glance at the compulsory Related Parties disclosures of Spectrum Care accounts on the Charities website shows their 7 General Mangers get paid an average of $165,525 per year. My guess is that the top bod would get more. Some Trustees also have cross memberships on different charities. I didn't find out their fees.

What NZDSN are is an umbrella body for organisations paid to provide disability support workers. NZDSN consistently misrepresents itself as representing disabled people- IT DOES NOT.
If in addition there is some dodgy stuff relating to charitable status, then it's past time this outfit got outed.

thanks for your post Wendi, I find anger can be a very useful emotion and there's a deal of it in this space, with good reason.

Aah damn it Adrian (and Kevin): I suspect it's me being a technobunny. One can navigate to the conversation and copy the link at the top, but it probably does nothing beyond taking one to the Suffrage 125 page, not to the actual post. If there's an easy-ish way of linking to it, I'd be very happy indeed to know. In my defence, I did learn to write with pen and inkwell, so I've not done too badly in the keeping up with technology stakes.

Kevin raises the matter of salaries etc.Given the amount of funding that gets to disability organisations, I'm inclined to believe that the smaller organisations have very little room for bloat of any kind. Having been in there scrabbling for money to keep a smallish DPO afloat, and well aware of others in a similar position I'm aware the government rhetoric about support for disabled people and disability services far outstrips what they had out. There may be a few of the bigger organisations where the top level is getting a fair level of salary, but they are few and far between. And most of the lower down staff are paid very modestly indeed

Some of the larger Contracted Providers of disability support services do very well indeed.

Always an interesting exercise trawlng the Charities website...I fully recommend it.

One of the big 'charities' had an operating surplus of tens of millions in the same financial year that a resident was neglected to death...largely due to too few staff on duty.

And that was not the only case... Spectrum was investigated after another tragic death...one of those managers commented that many of their staff had trouble reading English...so vital care instructions were not read.

Ho hum. Another disabled person dies on a care facility.

And there was barely any outrage from the so called disability advocacy groups.

.