This site is an archived version of Indymedia prior to 5th November 2012. The current site is at

National Day of Action Against Welfare Reforms


Beneficiaries who have had enough of the attacks on them by this government will be picketing Work and Income (WINZ) offices across the country in a national day of action.

The National Day Of Action Against Welfare Reform is being called for Friday October 5 by the Facebook group Occupy WINZ. The group is coordinating with people and organisations across New Zealand  who oppose the governments agenda for welfare reform and are calling for people to join in protests on the day.

Details of events are being coordinated in towns and cities throughout the country and will be posted on the National Day Of Action Against Welfare Reforms page as they are organised.

Olive McRae of the Occupy WINZ group says 'it needs pointing out that what we are facing is a war on the poor. We have working poor now, on minimum wage needing food parcels from food bank. We need to really plug a united front. Its not just beneficiaries, its all of us. Low paid workers included.'

"Poverty doesn't exist as an individual problem, and anyone of us could find themselves at some point needing to go on a benefit especially within this economy climate. I urge all people to stand in solidarity with and show support for the people struggling to provide the basic needs for their families and those being targeted and attacked in these latest reforms,' said  Christchurch organiser Joanna Wildish.

"Work and Income NZ is already systematically abusive and time wasting, it is designed to make those who need help feel like untrustworthy criminals in need of interrogation more than care and support, and the policies the Nats and ACT are pushing through are only going to make it worse by creating a defunct and inaccessible welfare system. We need to fight these reforms for all of us, whether you are a beneficiary or not - this affects us all."


Organising Meeting for Christchurch

Organising Meeting for Christchurch: Workers Educational Association, 59 Gloucester St, Monday, 17 Sept, 7pm.


would be good if things like this were not (only) organised on facebook. we ought to be looking at alternatives to corporate (and state cooperative) social media such as
remember, is asked, facebook will hand over any and all data requested by cops/intelligence agencies.

Alternatives to FarceBook

Totally agree. I see no problem with detourning FB by promoting groups and events on it, and then redirecting people who look at the community or events pages to another website which we control, by running it on free code/ open source software. I agree about using, which runs on a free code engine called Crabgrass, developed by RiseUp Labs. I also recommend for groupware tools like mailing lists, wiki, blog etc.

One FB alternative I've been heading a lot about recently is Friendica:

The same approach can be used with Twitter. Activists can set up an account on, which runs on the free code StatusNet software (or their own StatusNet site), and then connect it to a Twitter account, so that every time they send out a status message through, it is copied onto their Twitter stream. This way the activist can use and encourage others to connect to them there, but their messages can be followed by people who choose to stay on Twitter.

I concur

Let's start looking at promoting this kind of stuff outside of facebook - remember - we are not all with facebook these days. You guys thought of making a homepage?

Yes it must be so dammed

Yes it must be so dammed difficult to find out events or other stuff happening when they aren't promoted on sites such as indymedia or scoop or personal blogs or even at public meetings. Although I suppose they could make a homepage at wordpress or blogger or livejournal.


What's with the attitude

What's with the attitude Kerry? It's a real issue for many people not just on Facebook, but not online at all (or very little). You of all people should be aware of teh digital divide in this country.

I support this action and wish it all the best, but has anyone attempted to notify and co-ordinate with the workers at WINZ? It's going to be pretty confrontational for those there, who although some may be derserving of the attention, may actually be against what their masters are pushing through. I ask because at the last picket I went to outside MacDonald's the workers there were pretty upset that they were targetted, despite supporting the cause in principle. Maybe the PSA should be brought into the picture?


Cool just saw the statement

Cool just saw the statement on the Facebook page re workers at WINZ. Still would be good to flyer drop them or chat beforehand?


I would question the attitude

I would question the attitude of people who complain that this is only being organised on facebook just after my comment of a public meeting happening in christchurch - I'm sure there will be meetings in other centers as well - I just don't have that information on hand. How about rather than picking holes in what the organisers are doing a much more productive tactic could be asking - what can we all do to reaching people who don't use facebook, but no by being preoccupied by what medium the message orginates from all you are doing is forcing the organisers to defend what they are doing rather than organising the action in question. This type of passive aggressive questioning is just tiring a waste of time and space.


Anyway I've said my peace and won't be clogging this thread up with unproductive debates, if people do want to debate this with me they can find me on facebook.

On the contrary, if we can't

On the contrary, if we can't learn from our organising while doing it then we're never going to get anywhere. People highlighted legitimate concerns about how many, if not most, actions like this are solely online on a forum set up for discussion. They were'nt brought up to detract from teh message, but so that the message could be spread further, for the benefit of the action itself. If we can't have that discussion here, where can we have it? Instead you've just got shitty about being pulled up for being aggressive yourself... go figure.


FaeceBook are censors

No Kerry, I can't find you on FaeceBook. I don't have an account, as I have made a principled choice not to support a monopolistic corporation, who sell their users to advertisers, and have shown no respect for people's privacy, rights, or basic freedoms:

By making FB the primary online portal to an activist campaign, and by demanding that we challenge that on FB, you are applying social pressure on people to create an account with this abusive corporation.

Organising activism via FB is a bit like holding your public meetings in the food court of a megamall, and telling us to come find you at the McDonalds counter if we have a problem with that. I have no problem with people going to the mall and handing out leaflets, inviting people to a public meeting or a demo which takes place in a non-corporate space - this is an example of engaging people where they are, and informing them of alternatives to life in the mall. You see the difference?

If you don't think there's any difference, why encourage people to post articles on Indymedia, instead of justing sending a press release to

tedious whining from people who do nothing

Instead of moaning at kerry how he should be doing things in real life instead of facebook, why don't you both go along to the real life meeting which Kerry just advertised. Jared, try to stop being shitty at people for things they have not done.

As one of the event

As one of the event organisers, I'd just like to say that while we use FB to promote and organise, it isn't the sole way we are doing things. I understand there are many issues using it, but it is a way that many of the people we need to reach connect, and connect quickly. However, I'm also organising things via email, txt and phone, and face to face. We are also promoting via good ol' traditional methods too: Posters and flyers, radio and print media (mainstream, independant, student), and networking networking networking. I'm directly contacting dozens of of community groups and organisations that are on the frontline of poverty. THEY help spread the word to the people we REALLY need out on the street. I think the biggest failing I've seen in protests recently is that they rely far too much on social networking sites full-stop. It's very easy for someone to say they'll get involved via keyboard, a completely different story to meet them face to face and actually challenge them to get off their arses and ACT.

Just my ten cents worth. :) 


Are you guys serious? These reforms are needed. I don't like the idea of a bunch of scum using taxpayer funded money to buy drugs, and then fail a drug test then continue being unemployed and the cycle repeats. I also dislike those on the sickness benny who are perfectly capable of working, milking their medical condition to simply... not get a job. Are you people so blind you cannot see this? Oh wait, you all probably fit into the category of the system abusing scum I was just talking about. Yes I'm angry that I'm a sucker to the system, with a job, paying taxes, contributing to society, all the while there are SCUM enjoying freedom to a certain extent within the limitations of their welfare payments, drinking in the sunlight while I slave away at work. Note: Not denying there are those on welfare that sincerely need it, I am just referring to the proportion of scum that abuse the system. Note 2: When I say scum, I am not referencing any particular race, colour or religion, so please don't pull the race card.


So while you indulge in the abuse of supposed "SCUM", what and whom do you refer to? You are apparently having some real hang-ups and problems, as hate is the opposite of love.

Haters are ones who are selfish and do not want to work with others. I suppose that is your preferred society. Go back to Kiwiblog and Farrar, as "fartarses" are best kept in such zoo like "hate circuses".


Get back when you have learned to share and care, thank you.

Are you serious?

The scum I refer to, are those who do everything they can, to not get a job. The leeches of society. There is a proportion on the social welfare in New Zealand who do legitimately need it, as there is a proportion of those on the social welfare who simply abuse the system, in order to remain on the benifit for life.

You said it, sharing is caring. There are givers, and there are takers. The welfare system was designed to help those without jobs, until they get back on their feet, and get into jobs of their own, so they too could contribute to society. Then of course there are  those who are happy surviving with payments from the sweat off other peoples backs. Who do not want to have a job, ever.

I am more than happy to have tax payer money helping out those who have been made redundant etc. On the other hand I'm not so happy to have some lazy person, sitting at home with the bong watching Dr Phil, failing drug tests, and failing to get a job, and failing at life, while I, and the majority of New Zealanders work and pay taxes so people like that can continue with their way of life. There is no hate. Just disappointment and confusion as to how this website can support these pathetic people.

You claim I'm a hater and am selfish, am I really? Like I said I don't mind helping those who need it. But those who sit there with their hands out asking for more, whilst doing nothing to improve their own situation, don't exactly deserve it.

Sick and disabled

You go on about people on the sickness benefit "capable" of working. Do you even know what you are talking about? To get the sickness benefit one must present a medical certificate from a doctor or other registered, qualified and well respected health professional. You are apparently thinking it is easy to "pretent" to be sick. That may pass for a very short time, but pretty soon any medical professional will realise that she or he may have been taken for a ride.

On top of this most GPs and other medical professionals tend to be rather conservative and pro work focused people. They do not hand out medical certificates willy nilly for fun or for some cash on the hand!

And re "capability" to work, that is a matter not as straight forward as you as an apparent layperson may see it. To be entitled to a sickness benefit a person must be unable to work full time for more than 30 hours. So it does not rule out some part time work or activities.

Consequently you will see some on sickness benefits be able to do some things that may make them "appear" to be able to work, but they would not be able to do so in a proper job that they may have had. Some have physical, some mental health issues. A fair number have complex conditions.

The SB also is the same as the dole, so to live off it is no easy feat, it is actually very difficult to survive on it, unless a person cheats the system somehow. That though is another story, and I do not defend fraud or cheating.

To qualify for the more stringent invalid's benefit a person must be unable to work for more than 15 hours a week, be severely and permanently (for at least 2 years) unable to work. Again doctors and health professionals of other qualifications will never certify it too easily.

To maintain entitlement to SB you must present a medical certificate every 3 months and face an extra 12 month review, so that sets a rather tight regime for this. IBs are in most cases reviewed every 2 years, and standard practice is to send a client to a "designated doctor", who are actually "trained" by MSD and thus also often somewhat "biased". To pass them a person will have to have very compelling evidence, yet in some cases people are thrown off and put on the SB, even though they are severely and permanently sick or disabled.

Also are many on SB for years, which means they should really be on the IB, but WINZ does not grant them that, as their staff does all to save costs and keeps so many on SB, even though they would (if treated fairly) qualify for IB. The SB is only meant to be a temporary benefit, but has not been this for so many for a long time.

The regime to come will follow the UK example of recent welfare reforms and cause a lot of distress and hardship for very many.

While you go on about "scum" and supposedly "lazy" and whatever people, where are the jobs by the way, you want these people to work in.

Sadly you are one of the too many ill informed, biased, brain washed puppets in NZ population that falls for all this crap being dished up as "necessary". A government cutting, slashing and penalising the poor, and at the same time not doing a good job running the economy and creating jobs is an abysmal performance. Then again, I see a lot of incompetence and hopeless actions happening in NZ all around me. It makes me wonder at times, how this country still functions.

A bit more education, proper, true information, honesty and fairness would create the best grounds for this country to get out of the mess, but that is not wanted. Division, misinformation, spreading hatred and distrust is what the government wants. Divide and rule is the agenda, you seem to fall for it.

you CAN'T be serious

Explain this then, my neighbour is on the SB, 44yo, never worked a day in her life. Reason for being on SB, social anxiety, can't be around people. She drinks basically every day, and yet her social anxiety doesn't seem to stop her from going to every rock concert under the sun, or going to the RSA a couple of times a week. System abusing scum right there. 

My point has nothing to do with those who need/require to be on whatever benefit, my point is against those who clearly defraud NZs flawed welfare system. I never once referred to those who legitimately need the benefit as being lazy. You must be illiterate because as forementioned in previous posts I was talking about those who do everything they can to not attempt to get jobs. A requirement of the unemployment benefit is to be ready and willing to take any job that comes up. Yes you argue the point there are no jobs to which I reply, that isn't the point, the point is there is a proportion of long term beneficiaries who don't want a job, and by continually failing drug tests is one way used to remain a statistic in the system. Seriously... use your mind. There are SOME people taking the system and the hard workers of New Zealand for a ride and having a right laugh in between hits from the bong/lightbulb at us hard workers paying tax to them. 

The govt isn't penalising the poor, but trying to weed the system abusers out and put them on the right path, y'know helping those who are too lazy to help themselves. Again I can imagine thepoint being argued, but there's no jobs, I agree theree isn't much out there but there is also the problem of those not making the effort.

Hogwash nonsense

What a load of nonsensical drivel you go on about. If a person with such anxiety, that supposed "neighbour" of yours suffers from, then drinks every day or so, then it is clear that there may also be "addiction" and perhaps more of an issue.

Social phobia is not seldom "self medicated" by sufferers, which can lead to drug or alcohol abuse, which then adds further problems.

Admittedly one problem with the existing welfare system is, there is insufficient help and insufficient in the way of measures to ensure that treatment is offered and made available.

The health system itself is also not catering enough for this.

As for treatment - all that costs money, which governments so far have not been willing to spend. Also is this government just talking about doing more, but wait and see, it will become clear that they are just uttering verbal diarrhoea.

Even if some mentally sick or addicts get treatment offered, for some it will not work. Now imagine your solution: Perhaps cut the benefit, so such people lose homes, shelter and more, ending up on the streets. Some will commit suicide. Pressure may work for some, but certainly not for all.

So Bennett, Key and Co can get lost. They will only destroy more lives and solve very little or nothing.

It also does not convince what you write, because WINZ already use their own doctors and internal health advisors to deal to difficult or suspicious cases. So why did they not address the alleged "problem" you think you have detected? Maybe there is a diagnosis you as layperson do not know, have not seen and do not understand.

Have a chat to David Shearer, maybe you can add another story to his "sickness bene roof-painter" version?


I never mentioned she was

I never mentioned she was self medicating or addicted or even has a drinking problem. She is just a party animal, and has numerous friends over fow a few drinks and gets rowdy. She often goes into Auckland cbd, the most densely populated foot traffic in NZ, and seems to not have a problem with being around huge crowds etc. 

Futhermore, you are yet to attempt to debunk my statement about those who do indeed take the system for a ride. All you have mentioned is the requirements to stay on the benefit as a SB or IB, which doesn't seem to be foolproof. Are you really in denial about people being happy not working, and living off the dole? Here's an actual example, a guy was working for a friend of mine for 6 weeks before chucking the job in and going back on the dole, because for $150 less a week he didn't have to put in a hard days work for 5 days a week, and he could "go surfing everyday and get up when I want". Again I will stress the point I'm completely aware not all beneficiaries are like that, and that it's only a small percentage that are, but it's that small percentage that is taking up the resources that are needed for those who require it.

Some never get it

Sorry, I cannot bother debating any further at this silly level. If you get so worked up and believe to have the proof that those ones you refer to are "cheating" the system, then confront them and also let them face the music.

Check the figures for welfare fraud, and you will see how high or rather low the percentage is.

You want to stick to your views and beliefs, and I am not going to waste my time by those feeling as you do. Go and give big Paula a cuddly hug then, she may buy you a cake for your birthday.


Friend, I will address your

Friend, I will address your 'are you smarter than a sixth grader?' argument.

 If we follow the argument through logically that- because there is an element of abuse than we should wipe the whole system, we would have no male teachers ( as the majority of paedohilic activity in our schools is perpetrated by males), we would have no doctors or nurses giving out medication ( as there are nurses and doctors who illegally aquire medication for profit and personal use) and we wouldnt have dentists to fix our teeth because dentistry has the highest rate of suicide in any career. In fact we would have no services or government because of the corruption in business and government. Your argument that the people in the system must be perfect for the sytem to exist is ludicrous. Infact what yOu say is a beneficery problem would apply to all of society, which means any kind of service or goods industry should be dismantelled. That my freind essentially would make you closer to an anarchist than you may want to admit. Your argumrnt doesnt have any logic if applied to the very system you claim to uphold and rely on.

I think youre jealous of your neighbour for enjoying her life. I was a on benefits, in australia where the benfits are far more generous and socially responsable than here. I would not have been able to do my masters degree in new zealand like I did there. In twelve months on benefits I completed my masters degree, cared for my child as a single parent and worked casually to top up much needed finances whilst getting work experience in my career! When I was enjoying my much needed beer on a sunny afternoon you probably wouldve resented me, with your beneficery objectifications and your illogical arguments. That was 8 years ago. I have another baby now, and am not on benefits. My partner and I live an average hard working 'middle class life" And yet we cant afford to buy a home because its almost double what we would be paying in rent currently. We made the conscious decision to parent our children rather than struggle and put our child into day care to pay a mortgage. Now is that fair? The middle class if they want a home in wellington ( where we live and my partner works) cant afford to raise our children and own a home. John Keys went on record and said that if single parents go back to work and put their children into daycare they will be 10 000 better off annually! Is this how the governments redefines what childhood is? Just money? Is that what My child is worth financially to our govenrment 10 000 lousy bucks? Does this make sense to you, are you a parent, would you sell your life and your childs life for 10 000 bucks?

That my freind is a social and financial injustice. Only rich people living in the city can afford to parent their children now and own a home? What kind of society and government thinks this is O.K? Even our childrens lives are being squeezed for every last dollar whether yourE on benefits or middle class by forcing them into a daycare system. And kiwis wonder why everyone is moving to OZ? Leaving the classic question are we a country that has had its brain drained? When I hear comments like yours I realise this probably is the case. Youre one of those who dont have a brain to think through a fundemental social and ethical issue to its end point, to test whether it is actually logical. Oh thats right, Im justifying my argument that you are stupid by saying all of new zealand must be ignorant and lack moral and intellectual intelligence because you do. Thats essentially what your argument is about beneficeries, how does it feel to be called stupid? How does it feel to be called intellectually lazy and moral scum? How does it feel to be apart of the brain drain? The most telling point is that its the beneficeries who are standing up! I dont see mass protEsters of families who cant afford to raise their children standing up against crippling policies...So who are the lazy ones now? Have you protested against the very tax policies that keep you working longer hours for less access to resources than any other generation in the history of the planet? Your labels of scum and laziness are projections of your own lack of social involvement. I hope I see you one day standing up about food, water and resouce issue that affect us all rich or poor.  And I for one will be one of those standing with the beneficeries because I am an educated and intellegent human being who knows how to think and see what is happeneing to our communities.


WOW... just WOW

If you actually put in the same effort of READING my opinions as you did to write your own I wouldn't think you should ask for a refund on your masters degree. My logic had nothing to do with undoing the fabric of a civil society, in order to punish the small percentage of those who abuse the systems. 

  I'm 25, married with a boy on the way, and own a home in Auckland, well the bank owns 1/4. No I didn't have mummy and daddy spoon feeding me it's called hard work and budgeting. The economic downfall of NZ is buying crap they don't need with money they don't have, and having kids they can't afford. I don't have one singular issue with those on the benefi who actually need it. I've said a few times I'm more than happy to let these people have tax payer funded payments to BUY THE ESSENTIALS in order to survive. I work in a sea of statehousing. Clearly your experience as a beneficiary wasn't to the point where you were living was 5sq KM of statehousing. Watching the early twenty year olds, just a wee bit younger than i, walk past Cody's in hand  saying things like "get back to work, we want our dole" then laugh their heads off. Mothers pushin prams, preg with a 2nd, ciggy in mouth, asking to 'bum a dollar? please g I'm broke'. Then I wonder how people like this have kathmandu jackets and iPhones. On Cambell Live a few months ago they were interviewing people outside WINZ about why they can't get jobs, dozens of them mentioned criminal convictions. Why should society pay for those who won't obey the rules, and these people didn't look down, they were all smiles and giving the camera the finger. 

One of the reforms is cutting off the benefit of those with arrest warrants if they don' hand themselves in within 38 days. Good luck with gaining support for your protest against that.... Where does the ethical, logical and moral outcome of this go? Tell me I'm tto stupid

Cutting the benefit for those who keep failing drug tests and wasting tax payer money on drugs, is your dreamworld society okay with that?

Sending people back to work so they can be 10k better off.... I LOVE your argument on this one. How about times are tough, therefore sacrifices need to be made. I know many women, single or married that have had chlderen and gone back to work when the child is 12-18months, even as part time cleaning houses or whatever. To put your child in daycare for a few hours a day while you're at work isn't selling your child, its providing for it like a good parent should, at 10k more per annum, than the payouts recieved from the govt. Buying a house in NZ is an absolute BS time to do it, so don't worry, it's goung to get worse. Wife's aunt is a heinous evil and despicable real estate agent (lovely lady just despise her profession), and she was goiing on about the influx of chinese with money is helping bump up the house prices, as at nearly every auction is won way above QV/CV by a chinese family. 

Is it really the beneficiaries who are standing up against these reforms, or is it the jobless leeches of NZ that Occupied Auckland, whilst all they manage to do was smoke lots of pot intheir tents, and damage council/public property, or are the protesters the ones that turn up to every protest available in NZ, because I didn't know professional protester was a job title, OR are the ones standing up against these reforms all of the above?

Maybe I dont need a refund on

Maybe I dont need a refund on my masters degree as much as you need to get a one. I hear perfectly what youre saying and I can competently undermine your arguments by just following through with your own logic. 


So, by what youre saying, just for the exercise of taking your argument and extending it, Youre more than happy to 'suck it up' with hard work whilst your child is in day care, because these are tough times and we got to get in there first before the chinese do........Speaking as a mother, your ideas about parenting will change once your baby arrives hopefully, and your understanding on what being a parent means will deepen. Have you ever spoken to daycarers? I have. I asked them what the worst part of their job was, and Ill tell you what theyve told me on numerous occasions. Greeting those babies in the morning at 8 and watching as their exhausted parents picked them up at six, five days a week. For ten thousand dollars? They hardley knew their own childrens developments let alone their days activities. If youre telling me thats O.K for the government and culture at large (to not just offer this as a parenting option in parenting but) as a forced institution, than your idea of justice and work are in competition to the very notions of family values and community. 


Because of your open response I realise youre a charactor who is obviously self centred under the guise of classist and racist propaganda so as to support your own notions of superiority to the poorer people you feel engulfed, overwhelmed and surrounded by, but ontop of that you feel surrounded by the 'richer' chinese also who as you claim are buying up all the property. How funny. You cant win can you?

What I will say is best of luck with your fathering, and best of luck with your payments on your mortgage, but its screaminlgy obvious youre bitter that you could only afford to live amidst the housing section. Thats too bad, while all the chinese can raise their children in those more affluent areas, but hey after this house you can move up in the market...oh thats right youll be surrounded by chinese. Whoops! Your child will go to day care with those beneficery babies or if youve invested and moved on, those chinese babies and undoubtably your son will become best friends and then marry up in class (from where you came from) and marry a nice chinese girl, or boy should the case be....

Forgive me if I dont stand with you for the government saving you from the poor and chinese (and god help them if theyre poor and chinese). I do however sincerely hope your child doesnt suffer from any disability, because god knows its a blessing to have a healthy child, but to have a disabled child whether visible or not, you may find the very policies you fight for now, are the very policies that your child may battle for in the future. Would you want to look after your disabled child? r are they going to be institutionalised aswell, hey if you opt to care, youll need that benefit more than evert to save your home. Think about all these scenarios and ask yourself if life gifted me with an autistic or mentally or physically disabled child, what would life be like for our family and our child, now and in the future. 

Its called caring. You should try it sometime. It will turn you into a parent and help save our planet. 


I said I WORK in the amongst

I said I WORK in the amongst the statehousing of South Auckland. We LIVE in the better part of Botany (east Auckland), so am certainly not bitter with my choice of where to live. Sure I'd like a mansion like Mr Dotcom's, but clearly I cannot afford it, but eventually my family and I will get there. Hard work and budgeting. Knowing your limitations in this economy. That is why we own 3/4 of a house we can afford, and will own out-right within a couple of years, without the debt of a masters degree dragging us back.,

You're conversations with daycarers are one thing, the govt expectation of actively looking for part-time work is another. Your daycarers are saying that these mothers work full time, are tired at the end of a hard days work, and are missing out on their infants growth. Part time is different love, besides it isn't written that you MUST work, but to be actively searching and ready for work, even if part time.

If my child were disabled in some way, then I would of course rise to meet the challenge, of course I and my wife would care for it, and not see it as a financial burden, but we would always sort something out, even if it means the wife stays home or we take turns etc.

Glad to hear your not

Glad to hear your not surrounded by the ones you see as scum. makes life easier for everyone ;)


So you and your wife would take turns to 'work it out'. That is fragile sense of secuirty, to depend on only your partners ability to earn.  What happens if your wife develops MS? Cancer or severe post natal depression? ive had PND with my first child and believe me it aint pretty, and youd be tearing your hair out trying to make the family function wondering why she cant care for the baby or even for herself, or she cant stop crying or feels no love for you anymore ( theses amongst others are symptoms of PND). What happens if she cant work nor care for her child, so you have to? What happens if for unforseen reasons you loose your job? Then youre jobless. What happens if you and your sick wife and disabled child are all trying to finish off a mortgage without a single cent coming in? Will you loose all that youve worked for security wise to the bank because the bank forcloses on you in the toughest of times?


Were all so vulnerable to life we dont even realise. Thats why a good social security system in place is so important. Unless your stinking banker rich, theres no security against poverty. 

 Have you ever heard of the story of Job in the bible? Its thought to be the first book written in the torah (bible). Its more relevent now than ever. The story is essentially, a rich happy family man who over the course of time loses everything. he loses all his family in tragic blows, he loses all his wealth, his friends and finally his health. He sits under a tree with nothing but a piece of clay to scrape off his crusted boils and wonder what the purpose of life is. What he realises is that he is living because he feels love for god, all that he has left, even through everything, even through he wondered how god could let this happen.


The purpose of life is to care, and the moral of the story of the bible. To care about the other, in all forms, is what makes life meaningful. Thats why we should all remind ourselves and others that the very essence of what a government should stand for is caring for the very people it says it 'protects' with its corporate and warring policies. Its very important to refresh peoples minds that values such as caring and sharing (the substance that makes your marriage and family work). These are the foundations for life and the government is ethically and morally obliged to hold up these fundemental principals. We as members of that society are obliged to remind the government and the greater public of this obligation. We as mothers will stand together on this issue. i hope you can hear my point and come and stand with us. Its about not pointing fingers but creating safety nets for those who generally and genuinely need it. We cant throw out the baby with the bath water.  Thanks for the discussion. 

PFFFFFFFT the Bible.

The bible was an average set of short stories, glad they didn't write a sequel. Because of my life choices, and ambition to do something with my life and choose a field of expertise that would forever be required as long as the human race exists, I know full well my job will be safe, with enough pay to tackle any curveball life throws at us, whatever that may be: cancer, disabled child, post natal depression or multiple sclerosis (sp?). I chose not to go to university for I knew a massive debt would incur, I chose to buy a house when I had more than enough for a deposit and could comfortably pay it off without realising that money is disappearing from our bank account each fortnight. I do not believe in a god that would test Job's faith by ruining what he had (what a C-U-Next-Tuesday). Either way, the story of Job was simply that... a story, contained in a book of short stories.

My opinions of the bible certainly doesn't reflect that I don't care about other people. I do. I care about those who sincerely need help, not those who take advantage of those willing to give help, by not doing a thing to help themselves. You can lead a horse to water you can't make it drink (giving them the tools to do something, and them not using them, IE school, university, apprenticeships, short-courses etc). A percentage of those on the dole are those who left school with no qualifications, and effed their lives up by experimenting with drugs, alcohol and crime. With a criminal conviction and/or drugs in your system, it's bloody hard to get a job that pops up over someone with neither of those things. Is society really held accountable for the way of life of some of these scumbags? How are you so unable to see my point that YES there are people who need benefits as a requirement for survival whether they are on the sickness benefit, invalid or made redundant, or simply willing but unable to find a job. Then there ARE those do not want a job, and will not get a job as long as they live, but are more than happy to accept taxpayer funding so they can live while the rest of us work to make society continue. There are givers and there are takers sweetie, just like there are those who need help and will accept it until they are on their feet again, and there are those who will take and take and take, making no effort for themselves, expecting the givers to just keep on giving and wanting more of it.

The 1% are the Real Beneficiaries of This System

@Anonymous Coward

Three things.

One, your irrational prejudice against users of drugs (not including alcohol, and tobacco) is sad and uninformed. It's possible to drink alcohol and hold down a job. Therefore it's also possible to smoke cannabis, drop LSD, or knock back an E on the weekend, and hold down a job. In fact, international drug experts agree that cannabis, LSD, and MDMA are significantly less dangerous than alcohol (, so it should be easier for users of those less danger drugs to hold down a job. Drug testing beneficiaries is pointless, and refusing them a job or a benefit for the sin of choosing the less dangerous drugs is stupid.

Secondly, do the math. Because of the financial crash of 2008, there are now significantly less fulltime jobs available than there were in 2008. That means that regardless of how motivated people are in jobseeking, there will be more unemployed people than there were in 2008, and therefore more people on benefits. Just in case you struggle, like so many beneficiary-bashers do, with concrete operational logic, let's use a simple analogy. Imagine you have a 2 litre jug full of water, and an empty 1 litre jug. All that water is not going to fit into the smaller jug, and it doesn't matter how motivated those drops of water are, or what you threaten them with, it's just not physically possible. Again, do the math.

Which leads to my third point. Making life on a benefit hell will do nothing to create more dignified jobs for people, and nothing to improve their confidence, or their motivation, or their life skills, or their work skills, or their ability to find and hold down a job. While we are short of jobs and money in this country right now, we're not actually short of the basics of life. We have enough houses, food, clothing etc for everybody to have what they need. As well as being compassionate, making sure everyone can afford these basics, at whatever price society (currently via the market) charges for them, is economically rational; it keeps the businesses which provide these things solvent, which keeps their employees in jobs. So benefits, as well as being good for the person receiving them, actually don't cost society anything it shouldn't be providing anyway, and brings economic benefits to society.

As for whinging about your "taxpayers money", maybe you could have a look at the millions of dollars governments waste on various forms of corporate welfare. Getting employed workers and unemployed workers scrapping amongst themselves is a just another benefit to the wealthy who are the real beneficiaries of this state-corporate system, paid for by your "taxpayers dollars".

hear, hear!

Even Cactus Kate is opposed to corporate welfare:

" ... it is always NOT okay to give money to otherwise successful corporates. .... I cannot explain to left-wingers why we should give welfare to those most successful in life. Because there is never an excuse." (Cactus Kate, August 2011)








Another that has missed the point.

There is no penalties for those NOT having a job, there are penalties for those not actively searching,  or making the effort. I am aware of your analogy, and yes I do agree there are not nearly enough jobs for those without, and yes it is partially the govt's fault for not creating jobs, as it is also MORE partially the big business/corporations that are at fault. Cost cutting and maintaining less staff to keep their profit margins thanks to the financial crash of 2008. Yes a lot of people were made redundant, and I feel for them and yes they need our taxpayers to help, but the ones who do nothing to help themselves are the ones leeching from us.

Why would anybody in their right mind want to work there way up to the top of the ladder (in your world) only to be taxed to the bone, and not have a bigger salary and perks than those under them. That's how the world works sweetie. There are those who have the ambition to be at the top, drive the fancy cars, have the boat, the bach and the mansion, and the big salary. Then there are those who are at the bottom of the ladder who are in either dead end jobs, or have no intention to be in a management or supervisor position, and sit there whinging about how the top 1% of society is damned well better off, and they're wondering why. Further more, the taxes they do pay per annum, is usually a lot more than one would even earn in their yearly salary. I'm no way near the top 1%, but do I hate them? No, am I envious? No, am I inspired to get to the top and be where they are? You bet I am. Don't hate them because they had the drive and the ambition to be at the top, instead of being at the bottom hating those at the top and complaining and whinging about them, like most of the users of this website. The Occupy movement was an absolute joke. Hating on the successful.... Pfft, "TAX THE RICH", they do get taxed at a higher much higher % and because the dollar value of what they earn that % works out to be quite a lot of tax dollars. 33% of $250,000 = $82,500.00 in tax. How many people do you know EARN $82,500.00 in a year? I bet not a lot.

Any employer who knew their staff were drug users, no matter what it was, weed, LSD, methamphetamine, would surely be unhappy about it, even if yes it was in their own time, not at work etc. Just because they already have a job does not make it okay. Drug usage is supposed to be something you grow out of in your early 20s/late teens, when the after-effects begin to take longer to make it out of your system, much like a hangover. We all remember when hangover's took half a day to go away, only to start taking 2 days of hell. We all remember the point in our lives when pot stops becoming interesting, and you realise it is the exact same buzz everytime, and rather boring. Yes Interstellar Overdrive by Pink Floyd is amazing when you're high amongst other things, but then you grow out of that and SORT YOUR LIFE OUT. Maybe our society is just too immature to realise when they need to actually do something with their lives instead of working full-time at a checkout in a supermarket, or at a video-store or being a priest, or whatever.

i didn't know cabbages could

i didn't know cabbages could type?!?!

family trusts

give you an example john key earns 50 million he puts this into a family trust and only has to pay 70000 because we have no capital gains tax need i say more


As much as I dislike Key, he's worth $50M, not earning $50M, and he donates his entire PM Salary to charity.

Welcome ?

Because you've made an attempt to respond intelligently to my comment, I'm going to apologise for calling you an "Anonymous Coward". You've clearly got a very different way of seeing the world to me, and to most of the people who regularly post on Indymedia. So either we've got a lot to learn from you, or you've got a lot to learn from us. Maybe a bit of both.

How about you set up an account, and comment regularly? You don't have to use your real name (very few of the people who post here do) but if you use the same name whenever you post, we can start getting a sense of who you are as a whole person with your own ideas and opinions. That way it's harder for people to write you off as a "right-winger", "redneck", or "troll" who is only here to start fruitless arguments.

Some people will still throw those sorts of labels at you, please ignore them. Such people expect this site to be a safe harbour where they can gather to agree with each other, a left-wing equivalent of echo chambers like the Free Radical, Eternal Vigilence, KiwiBlog, Whale Oil, and other fora where right-wingers spend their hours congratulating each other on how right they are. There are plenty of left-wing blogs like Capitalism Bad, The Standard, No Right Turn, Reading the Maps, and Bowalley Rd where lefties can go for that. If you look at the Aotearoa IMC mission statement and editorial policy, and the Principles of Unity of the global Indymedia network (see the side-bar on your right), that's not what Indymedia is for.

A huge chunk of the population voted for National in the last election. Not half of it, not even of registered voters, more like a third but a huge chunk all the same. They must have felt they had good reasons to do that, even though most of them seem as horrified as the rest of us by National trying to sell commonly-owned renewable resources (like the ability of our rivers to generate electricity) to private capitalists. Having people who are willing to engage in robust, respectful debate from that point of view is crucial to helping us move towards a politics of hands-on democracy, instead of the false solution of voting for Labour/Greens/Mana/NZFirst in 2014 and hoping, despite all past evidence to the contrary, that this will fix everything.

Pull up a chair, AnonymousUser, and give us a nickname to call you by.

BTW What is going on with moderating anonymous comments before they appear? This is totally against Indymedia practice of unmoderated posting, with any editorial clerking done after the fact. It's time for the people currently running this site to start running it like an Independent Media Centre, and working within the Principles of Unity, and the Membership Criteria (have you all even read them?), or change the name, and open up the space for someone who will.

What are you talking about

What are you talking about Strypey? Anonymous comments have never been or are not at the present time moderated before they appear. 

Bug Report


Then consider this a bug report. I initially posted without logging in. The site told me my comment was being held in a moderation queue, and the comment did not appear on the thread. That's why I logged in to post the comment, and added the bit to which you are replying.

For the record I'm also talking about a pattern of abuses of editorial privelges that I've seen happening on the site for a while. A couple of examples off the top of my head; Tim Wikiriwhi's articles being hidden, as far as I can tell for purely ideological reasons. I disagree with Tim's opinions as much as you do (if not more) but he has as much right to post them to the open newswire as anyone else. Then, emails to the addresses on the Contact Info giving the specific points on the Editorial Policy being violated went unacknowledged and unanswered. With editorial powers come editorial responsibility, and on Indymedia, from what I remember, accountabilty.


Seeing as you know so much

Seeing as you know so much about indy policy, you will know that this isn't the appropriate place to be announcing bug reports or complaining about hidden articles.


"We strive to make decisions in the most democratic, transparent and accountable manner. If you have any questions or concerns regarding our policy or our practice, please contact us at In keeping with this, the editorial policy is to be reviewed at every Aotearoa Indymedia conference."

Read > Think > Reply


As I said in the comment you are replying to, I did send email to that address (and others) at the time. No response. That's why I bring it up here. Also, you asked "what are you talking about", so I was answering your question.


>> I've not yet seen any false positives <<

I just reported one.

>> there has always been an editorial policy and comments and posts have been hidden or deleted based on this policy <<

I helped to write that policy. I know exactly what it says. It says, as I said above, that any moderation happens *after* the content is published, not before. The only exception to this in the Editorial Policy document on this site is when a person is posting high volumes of nuisance posting, with a clear intent to disrupt rather than discuss, in which case a collective decision must be taken that such a person is a spammer, and their common nickname(s) (and/or a description of their spam pattern) added to a publicly viewable list on the Indy wiki.

In case this is a defence of hiding Tim Wikiriwhi's articles, I don't see his name on this spammer list. Also, hiding a Māori person's opinions on Māori politics because you don't agree with them is patronising and racist.

>> Indymedias stopped being open newswires the moment they started being spammed with right wing crap not long after they began <<

"Right-wing", as used here, is a meaningless slur. Some marxists claim anarchists are "right-wing", and that Social Credit advocates are interchangable with neo-nazis. Other people think both anarchist and Social Credit (formerly part of the Alliance) are "left-wing" (for the record I think they're neither). Who gets to decide? Need I quote Chomsky at you my anarcho-syndicalist filos?

"I believe that people have the right of freedom and expression whatever their views, that the importance of defending these rights is all the greater when the person expresses views that are abhorrent to virtually everyone"

There's a clear difference between removing duplicates, advertising, verbal abuse etc and hiding articles and comments because you don't agree with the views they express.

I just reported one I've not

I just reported one

I've not seen any in the 'pending approval' queue, to be clearer. I'm not sure where it went, in that case. The platform isn't perfect; sorry about that.

It says, as I said above, that any moderation happens *after* the content is published, not before.

We get about 400 spam posts a day on average, peaking as high as 4,000. See If we moderated after it was posted, we'd be cleaning up content 24 hours a day. Moderatiing spam after the fact is plainly absurd.

There's a clear difference between removing duplicates, advertising, verbal abuse etc and hiding articles and comments because you don't agree with the views they express.

You missed our polciy of removing sexist, racist, or homophobic comments, etc. We remove those because we don't agree with the views they express. Then there's also 'clearly' off-topic comments. We remove those because they degrade the quality of content on the site. And there's pornography which we remove. So in actual fact, we start from a position on being a moderated forum, and its all shades of grey from there.

As for Wikiriwhi's aritcles, I don't know anything about that.

Stop censoring Indymedia


Fair point about the need for a spam filter, and you're right that no spam filter is perfect.

>> You missed our policy of removing sexist, racist, or homophobic comments, etc. We remove those because we don't agree with the views they express. <<

I know you do. I agree with the insertion of that clause into the Editorial Policy because it was explained that it would only be used to remove abusive comments, which had no content that contributed anything to the discussion.

The scope of that clause has become broader and broader over the years, so that now any article or comment can be hidden if it does not express the same opinions on gender or ethnic subjects that the ed group holds. I'm guessing that's why Tim's article got hidden, because some white anarchist decided they were racist, which as I said, is problematic at best.

You can filter comments all you like on your own blogs, and political sites according to your personal or group ideology. My point is you have no right to do this on an Indymedia site. Indymedia was set up as a neutral, common ground, for robust discussion between *anyone* who opposes the state-corporate system, and it can't do that if you filter participation according to your own opinions of what is legitimate discourse.

I'm going to re-post this to imc-aotearoa, so the discussion can continue in the appropriate space. Anyone interested in participation can join that open-membership list:

High Horses

I would suggest anyone who does want to view the screeds of posts those naughty indymedia admins are hiding you could check out the hidden posts list:

False Positives

As far as Indymedia's mission, I think Radical summed the need for an ideology-neutral activist media site in a comment  made before the last election:"The internet is also dominated by commercial websites and media, although there is enough option to open blog spaces, own forums for discussions, and whatever. This facilitates "sectarian approaches" though, where the ones sharing their particular preferences stay amongst themselves and do not open up and share much with others that may only share "parts" of their ideas and views."

@ Kerry

Being patronising really helps, but I reckon sarcasism is even cooler :P Did as you recommended. (BTW I do like the way you can toggle the hidden comments on and off in each article) Here are some more false positives:

Government : Working to improve the life of citizens

Submitted by lucidsystems on 1 September 2011 - 10:13am.

Sounds like fun ...

Submitted by Anonymous's (not verified)


 on Thursday, 11 August 2011 - 10:01pm

No I am not reffereing to
Submitted by Anony-mooose (not verified) on Monday, 13 June 2011 - 8:59am

Thanks for your response I
Submitted by lorax (not verified) on Saturday, 23 April 2011 - 9:10pm
This is fantastic. Total
Submitted by Elizabiscuit (not verified) on Sunday, 27 March 2011 - 5:07pm There were a few more that were borderline and I can understand why someone hid them, although I wouldn't have. To me this is where the acid test applies; is it abusive? If so, hide. Does it contain an opinion someone might actually hold and defend in debate? If so, don't hide, even if it's a bit naughty, or by someone whose comments normally are abusive:

Isn't it just so ...

Submitted by Paul Sayers (not verified) on Monday, 11 July 2011 - 3:34pm
Sweet!!!  Where can I find
Submitted by The Real Lentil 4 (not verified) on Thursday, 16 June 2011 - 11:09pm
I agree mariana why
Submitted by iwantasustainablefuture (not verified) on Wednesday, 15 June 2011 - 9:16pm

what rape culture?? This

Submitted by flynn (not verified) on Monday, 27 June 2011 - 8:37am
"No sir, I don't like it" - Mr Horse

So I guess the eds are doing

So I guess the eds are doing a good job then if you have to go back to last year to find more suposed false positives, although I do notice at least one of those posts were a response to a designated spammer and commenting on a hidden posts means that post is automatically hidden as well...


>> Strypey: >> As I said in

>> Strypey: >> As I said in the comment you are replying to, I did send email to that address (and others) at the time. No response. That's why I bring it up here. Also, you asked "what are you talking about", so I was answering your question.


It appears that the indymedia lists have not beeb working for a few days. I've sent a couple of emails to our list 2 days ago and they still haven't been delivered. If you have sent your email in recent days, they are probably stuck somewhere in the www. We will have to wait until 'someone' fixes the problem.


@strypey BTW What is going on


BTW What is going on with moderating anonymous comments before they appear? This is totally against Indymedia practice of unmoderated posting, with any editorial clerking done after the fact.

There's only one possibility where comments aren't immediately appearing: that's when they have been flagged as spam and are posted as 'unpublished'. It's up to one of th eds to come by and mark it as 'published' if not. (Though I've not yet seen any false positives).

As for 'opening up the space', for as long as I've been involved with Indymedia it has always been a moderated space going back to 2003 — there has always been an editorial policy and comments and posts have been hidden or deleted based on this policy. Indymedias stopped being open newswires the moment they started being spammed with right wing crap not long after they began, and those that didn't currently lie dormant wastelands flooded with the stuff (or have since gone offline).


Some contradictions

@Anonymous User

You claim that you understand the water analogy, then you claim that the reason some people work minimum wage jobs is because they haven't tried enough to become the CEO of the corporation they work for. That's like trying to pour 100 litres of water into a 0.1 litre cup, and telling all the water that doesn't fit that it's not motivated enough. Can you tell me how society would work if everyone who worked hard became a manager?

I've published conservative figures on this site (follow the link to see them) which show that a typical corporate CEO gets more than $300 for an hour of sitting on the toilet, while the worker who cleans that toilet earns about $13 an hour. Can see any sense in giving the highest pay to the people who do the most unpleasant work? If so, can you explain to me why our society does exactly the opposite?

Coming back to benefits, you admit that redundancies have been used as a strategy to keep profits up, yet you scoff at the idea that "the 1%" (shorthand for "the shareholding class who benefit from redundancies through increases in net wealth and dividents") gain their wealth at the expense of others. Do you see the contradiction there?

There are penalties merely for applying for a benefit, and more when you start drawing one. The worst harrassment comes in the first few weeks of losing your job, finishing study etc, with the excuse that this helps people avoid "welfare dependence" (more on that below). Long term beneficiaries like me still get harrassed, but we know the system, we have the confidence to stick up for ourselves, and we know when to get trained benefit rights advocates involved. Once you've been on a benefit for more than 3 months, and you've proved you're not an easy target, they start showing you a bit more respect. So the people who get the worse harrassment under the governments "reforms" are the ones you express sympathy for, the ones who have recently lost their job (due to government policy and corporate wealth-hogging) or haven't had one yet. Did you know that?

BTW "Welfare dependence" is an invented condition which reinvents peoples basic need for housing, food, clothing, social support etc as an addiction. That it's an empty propaganda term becomes obvious when you really think about the phrase; "welfare dependence" ie a dependence on being "well", which of course, is a condition every living being shares. The idea of "social welfare", like "public health", is that lifting up those at the bottom of the heap is good for everyone in the heap, especially in a "classless society" where every comfortable person is going to have a friend or family member at the bottom of the heap whose suffering affects them. I'd like you to watch Alister Barry's documentary 'In a Land of Plenty', (you can watch it without charge at the NZ On Screen website) before making any more internet comments on the topic of beneficiaries. Can you do that?

Re: drugs, refer to my last comment, as you have added nothing new for me to respond to. You are welcome to your opinions about drugs, but they do not reflect the findings of experts like those quoted in the link I have you. When a government has the courage to reform drug laws, and base them on evidence rather than prejudice, either alcohol will be made illegal (and we've already seen how well that works) or less dangerous drugs like cannabis, LSD, or MDMA will become legal to possess for use, and available in a quality-controlled form, from a publicly-regulated dispensary (whether that should be a supermarket, a cafe or a pharmacy, and whether it's for-profit, not-for-profit, or government-run, are all details to be worked out).

Oh dear ! so hard to read

Oh dear ! so hard to read this tripe ! when one cannot even arrange ones rants into correct paragraphs dear.

Maybe your friend should pay

Maybe your friend should pay better then??

hate and discrimination

No one milks their condition on a sickness benefit , as someone who has had 13 blood transfusions i resent this, i also have worked twenty years and now due to  two lots of surgery and the pain i get from it  it makes me unable to work full-time , however i do volunteer work half a day a week and hope my condition will improve, Put your name and adress you red neck and stand behind  your words instead of puting others down.



       They were active around Oliver Cromwell's time and were a English Commune,

one of the first groups in the 'workers commonwealth' to actively resist landlords from

fencing in and taking over, ownership of what were originally large tracts of land

held in common by villages. 

 (1)In 1649 to St. George's Hill

        A ragged band they call the diggers

           came to show the peoples will

        They dified the landlords, they defied the laws

        They were the dispossessed reclaiming what was theirs

         C  -   Dm    -     / F  -   C  -    /  -  -   Dm  -  /   F    CG   C  -

         (2) "We come in peace" they said " to dig & sow"

         We come to work the lands in common

                and to make the waste land grow

           This earth divided we will make whole

           So it will be a common treasury for all

         (3)  The sin of property we do disdain

           No man has any right to buy and sell the earth for polluted gain

            By theft and murder they took the land

            Now everywhere he walls spring up at their command

        (4)    They make the laws to chain us well

             The clergy dazzle us with heaven or they damn us into hell

             We will not whorship the god they serve

             The god who feeds the rich while poor folk starve

          (5)    We work, we eat together, we need no swords

             We will not bow to the masters or pay rent to the lords

              Still we are free, tho' we are poor

              You Diggers all, stand up for glory, stand up now!

         (6)     From the men of property, the orders came

              They sent the hired men and troopers

                  to wipe out the Diggers claim

                Tear down their cottages, destroy their corn

               They were dispersed, but still the vision lingers on

           (7)    You poor take courage, you rich take care

                This earth was made a common treasury for everyone to share

                 All things in common, all people one

                 "We come in peace"  - the order came to cut them down

                                         (COMMUNES NOT PRISONS)

National Day of Action - Henderson picket and march

For those living in Auckland, there will be one event that is planned to take place on 05 Oct. 2012 in Central Henderson - starting at midday. A march to the office of Paula Bennett appears to be part of the program there. For some further info see this link: