Just retired Labour MP off to Aussie as can’t get job in NZ
August 15th, 2008 at 7:51 am by David FarrarFormer Labour MP Georgina Beyer plans to move to Australia because she cannot find work.
The three-term Wairarapa MP, the world’s first transsexual politician, said she was disillusioned with life after politics and upset at the treatment she had received from her former Labour Party colleagues.
Ms Beyer said that while other former Labour MPs were appointed to boards, she had received nothing and was turned down for a position on the Human Rights Commission.
Good God. How dare they not appoint her. I mean how can you possibly get a job, unless your mates appoint you to a taxpayer funded board.
“That I’m of no further use to my country is why I’m considering Australia, that my former parliamentary colleagues seem not to want to appoint me to anything, but are quite happy to accommodate others who have left or are about to, so as to shut them up from whingeing from the sidelines in election year.
“One could be forgiven for being a little vexed.”
What a disgusting sense of entitlement she is exhibiting.
Tags: Georgina Beyer, Government Appointments
August 15th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Princess Georgie.
I wonder board he/she had in mind, and what skills he/she would have offered that board? By all accounts, his/her only claim to fame was that he/she was transexual, not for any work ethic or skills.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 7:58 am
I suppose we’ll get the usual monotonous stream of “bludger” comments because “she had been forced to accept the unemployment benefit for several months late last year…”
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 7:59 am
Do Labour MPs go into politics to do something for their country or for what they can get out of it for themselves?
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:09 am
Oh dear. Has the gravy train left the station Georgina?
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:11 am
silly georgina – you only jump AFTER you’ve inked the contract for the perk job.
playing primadonna, leaving, and then expecting largesse when your departure has no negotiating coin is just silly.
otherwise I am with Bob, another labour lackey reveals why she was “called to serve” her country so selflessly….
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:11 am
HHmmmm Toad, Beyer on the dole eh? Who would have thunk it!
Until you mentioned it no-one would have thought it possible given that any responsible person pulling the sort of salaries Georgie has over the last 10 years or more would be expected to have some investment income and would either have been unqualified or too proud to accept handouts.
We appreciate this insight into previously unknown details. Good thing that you are the “unimpeachable source”, otherwise you could be accused of fomenting mischief. HAH
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Toad, I noticed the bit about going on the dole. From Parliament to the unemployment benefit. Wouldn’t call her a bludger but it draws attention to our so-called means-tested universal state system (she still had assets) which pays everyone the same level of income regardless of how much tax they have or haven’t paid. Unemployment insurance should be private and competitive and provision for the otherwise needy, treated separately. (Yes I know there is such a thing as loss-of-earnings insurance but many cannot afford such after paying their taxes.)
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Its no secret that a fair number of MPs of all parties struggle to establish a career after parliament. Most of them, however, have the good sense not to moan about it to the media – they sure as hell aren’t going to win any sympathy.
If this is an example of Ms Beyers judgement, those not hiring her appear to have made a good call.
david (8.11)
Vote:The dole comment toad mentioned comes directly from the Espiner interview DPF linked to.
August 15th, 2008 at 8:34 am
Toad: Georgina was an MP for around eight years. She got a salary of three times the average wage during that period. She also would have around $270,000 in her parliamentary superannuation fund on top of any savings she personally made.
So it is legitimate to ask why someone who was earning three times the average wage for the last decade ($139,000 when she retired) and has a quarter of a million super fund (which one can access early) choose to rely on the taxpayer for income rather than her own savings?
It really comes back to whether you see welfare as an entitlement or a safety net.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:37 am
Fair cop bobux,
I must not jump to conclusions, …… I must not jump to …. ah what the hell, conclusion jumping is fun.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:48 am
This story is a fascinating insight into the mind of a socialist and the mindset of the New Zealand Labour party.
These pricks are of the honest (and no doubt genuine) belief that they have “served” the people of NZ at great personal cost and as such they deserve some govt appointed position irrespective of their ability (or lack of it) as a form of pension.
It just highlights their corrupt culture and arrogant belief that the money they receives from the tax payer belongs to them and that they have a god given right to expect to be able to dip into that money for their own use.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Rather than being ‘a fascinating insight into the mind of a socialist’ etc, I’d say it’s a fascinating insight into the mindset of NZ’s “Political Class”. These are people that are far removed from everyday life and don’t see their role in politics as a privileged opportunity to represent people but merely as part of a career path. Although obviously some MPs and ex-MPs have more of this disgusting sense of entitlement than others, I’d imagine it goes across party lines. Most MPs socialise together, chat in the Koru Club etc and are actually a fairly cohesive group of like-minded people. It’s a reflection that politics today is an elite activity which is part of a career rather than any mass movements of people.
Simon Carr of Act paints a similar picture:
It is a secret society, joined by covert bonds and awful oaths of loyalty (if not to each other). However much they attack their opponents, however different their world view is, however ferociously they represent their constituents’ interests – they have more in common with each other than they have with us. That’s worth unpacking: Jim Anderton has more in common with [Winston] Peters than he does with the homeless, the downtrodden, the huddled masses of Sydenham (Carr, 1997: p.37).
Bryce
Vote:http://www.liberation.org.nz
August 15th, 2008 at 9:04 am
DPF: Georgina came into Parliament in 1999, didn’t she? In which case she would have no superannuation entitlement as of right, only be “entitled to a superannuation subsidy [2.5 times the member's contribution] if the member chooses to contribute to a registered superannuation scheme”.
I, and I suspect you, have no idea what she contributed (if anything) to a super scheme, so have no idea what her super fund, if any, would amount to.
And while I certainly don’t think anyone should be able to acquire assets from welfare payments, I don’t see why those who are unemployed (or sick, or widowed, or who have split up with their partners) should be required to deplete their assets rather than access welfare payments to meet their day to day living expenses. Welfare should be sufficient to maintain a holding pattern for a person’s financial position.
[DPF: Only a mentally deficient MP would not contribute to a super scheme where you get a 5:2 subsidy. And I think we have a philosophical difference on welfare being there to allow people to maintain their assets. If Bob Jones takes a few months off his job, I don't want him going on the dole. And if as a small business owner I have a period where I can't pay myself because of lack of business, I can't and would not go on the dole]
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Her pulling out of the Fortune Theatre production “Six Dance Lessons in Six Weeks” two days before it opened speaks volumes about her reliability. Any credibility she may have had was extinguished when she left them in the lurch.
What could she possibly offer Australia?
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 9:12 am
toad, to put it in another way, you are saying that everyone else in the country should pay for someone’s living expenses so that they can avoid depleting their financial assets. Or, to be more blunt, pick the poorest taxpayer in the country. Say, an apprentice earning around $20K, given I think that we have no tax free threshold yet. This person should continue to pay taxes (rather than receiving a tax free threshold) so that someone who earned 7 times more than them for 10 years can avoid depleting their financial assets. Assets that said apprentice has no real hope of accumulating in the near future, but at least might have a go at if they didn’t have to pay tax. That is the actual opportunity cost of extending welfare to those who want it instead of those who need it.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 9:21 am
we should thank her for specifically confirming that Labour’s appointees this year are “so as to shut them up from whingeing from the sidelines in election year” … this from the mouth of someone recently within Labour’s inner circle
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 9:22 am
This is the one who spent the summer recess receiving her MP’s salary while rehearsing for a play at the Fortune Theatre; retired from parliament in February then pulled out of the play a few days before opening night. The play had to be cancelled at great inconvenience and expense to the Fortune.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 9:38 am
How many Labour MP’s does that make now that have indicated that their intention is to migrate from New Zealand?
They do the damage and then run off to avoid the consequences of their own actions. It’s truly disgusting of Labour MP’s to have this level of contempt for ordinary hard working New Zealanders. What’s the bet Hels runs away as soon as she is involuntarily permanently retired from New Zealand politics?
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Bryce hits the nail squarely on the head. What a disgraceful petulant tirade. I have enough airpoints to donate so Beyer can go and be our High Commissioner to Mururoa Atoll…
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 9:49 am
You can almost hear her sobbing the childhood melody – “Nobody loves me, everybody hates me, I’m going down the garden to eat worms”.
Oi – Georgie … Diddums !!
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:08 am
You harsh people, it now appears she did it for no remuneration at all.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:13 am
>>What could she possibly offer Australia?
I am sure there are some sickos in King’s Cross who would make it profitable for her to go back to her previous career before entering parliament
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:22 am
So, when it boils down, the much vaunted “colour” and “diversity” in our parliament is a total crock. All we have is a bunch of venal, self-serving whackos who have nothing but an unwanted agenda to offer.
I guess when you cut through the bullshit, and ask who has operational and management skills that would be valued in our society – the answers might give a clue as to who might offer the most value to the electorate.
But then even circus entertainers (and dance teachers perhaps) have a place in society so the three ring circus we have experienced in recent years should just be looked at as entertainment, without any lasting value or benefit. Sad really!
Just musing
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Dear oh dear, I guess Labour won’t be thanking her for raising the ‘jobs for the girls / boys / trannies’ issue just weeks out from the election.
I think Byer’s sense of entitlement comes from a grave dose of limelight deprivation.
Speaking of political appointments, I see former Winston First MP Brian Donnelly is leaving his Pacific post after just six months on health grounds.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Toad said: “Welfare should be sufficient to maintain a holding pattern for a person’s financial position.”
The problem with that Toad is that its very much open to abuse.
For example when I was working as at Case Manager back in ’04 I was involved in several cases which stuck in my mind.
1) A person who owned over $3 Million Dollars worth of Forestry Assets , however was still collecting Unemployment
2) A person who was told several months earlier she was going to be made redundent who then went and purchased a $900,000 home with this knowledge and was able to claim special benefit to cover the mortgage costs. While she had to try to sell the asset and remove the issue. the problem was however she had the property listed for triple the price paid to ensure nobody would purchase it.
3) A Person who had a trust setup owning at least 10 properties including the one he was renting (btw the rental agreement included power and phone), providing non financial assistance in the form of food and petrol vouchers and this person was still collecting Unemployment.
4) A person who had been on Unemployment for an excess of 10 years, had over $70,000 in redundancy however was seeing us for assistance to pay for some shoe inners.
Welfare should be there to assist people in their times of need, not as a lifestyle choice for those who don’t want to work.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Hmmmmmm … one might wish to reflect of the old Muldoon adage that went something along the lines of “Every Kiwi migrating to Australia raises the IQ of both countries” … but of course that isn’t true.
In ‘its’ case NZ is the winner and Aussie the looser.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:36 am
One also has to ask, what is wrong with a political system that puts into parliament, anyone who lacks sufficient skills to get even a basic job, let alone one that is forthcoming precisely BECAUSE of the fact that person has been an MP?…….how many more MP’s have we got that fit this criticism? (And what side of the house are they predominantly on?)
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Georgina could always return to “her” other pre-political profession – prostitution. After all, it’s not even illegal now!
There’s a new brothel opening soon just up the road in Dannevirke – why has “she” not applied for a position there?
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:48 am
I presume getting a job is about being able to sell your skills and demonstrate your abilities to fulfill the responsibilities of the job.
Vote:But being a member of the parliament (a socialist at that) they do not really understand the meaning of responsibility and the need to possess skills relevant to the position they are seeking.
All in All, Welcome to the real world baby!
August 15th, 2008 at 10:50 am
She/he/it will have seen the writing on the wall, and despite the (now retracted) promise of a Socially Engineered Palimony, Polyamory, and mulitple bigamous utopia.
Bright enough to split before the Levee breaks.
Good Night Ladies, Good Night ladies! etc.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Georgina is just the first Labour whinger who is out of a job.
There will be 20-30 more come November 9th
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Hear Hear philBest One would have to apply that to quite a few of the failed unionists in Labour!!
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Toad: “Welfare should be sufficient to maintain a holding pattern for a person’s financial position.”
LOL
Actually re 3-coil’s remark, there is no reason, ethically or otherwise, why Georgina couldn’t become a prostitute again, after all, i am sure she voted for its legalisation, and has rightly opined that prostetution is as good a career path as any, for a person who wished to make that choice.
Vote:Plus she could command big bucks too.
August 15th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Maybe National should appoint her to a really shitty job…like Capital Coast DHB?
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
It’s sad when your heroes let you down.
For a transsexual to get elected (especially for a seat in our banjo-twangin’, huntin’ fishin’ & killin’ rural heartland where men are men) was quite cool and gave me a lot of confidence that this country is capable of looking forward.
If Beyer or any of them expect to be appointed to the directorship of anything as a going away gift then it is perhaps time they remembered that most of the rest of us have to keep our cvs current and APPLY for jobs
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
RRM – this country will never be “capable of looking forward” while idiots like you think it’s OK to spew your “banjo-twangin’…etc” bigoted stereotypes around so freely…
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Sigh the further LEFT you go in the House the more you find those who are in the best paying job they will ever have in their miserable lives.
On the other hand the further RIGHT you go in the House the more who are earning less in some cases many multiples less than they could earn in the private sector.
Face it folks The LEFT both in the House and their supporters outside the House are merely suckers on the hard workers teats.
The RIGHT on the other hand often pay more in tax from other business interests than their parliamentray salaries.
So we have the LEFT who take more then they put in.
And the RIGHT who contribute more than they take out.
And thats why the LEFT should be terminated with extreme predjudice
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Not sure why RRM gets the thumbs down. I thought it was a reasonably considered comment – other than the banjo twangin bit.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Mr Nobody NZ said: The problem with that Toad is that its very much open to abuse. For example when I was working as at Case Manager back in ‘04 I was involved in several cases which stuck in my mind.
It shouldn’t be. That is why section 74(1)(d) is in the Social Security Act:
That section allows Work and Income to identify and not pay people who have deliberately arranged their affairs in order to meet benefit qualification criteria. It would certainly catch the person with the $3m in forestry assets, who could be earning an income from those assets and the one with the dodgy trust setup, neither of whom I believe should be getting a benefit either.
The other two examples you quote I can’t comment on, because you haven’t given sufficient detail – the house purchase, for example, may have been quite legitimate, in anticipation that she would easily get another job.
Just a pity though that similar legislation doesn’t exist for child support to target the deadbeat dads who arrange their affairs to minimise their financial obligations to their children.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Wot. Moaning because her mate’s won’t give her a job? So off to Aussie?
That’s a little tragic Georgina, you should grow some balls!
(Hang on!)
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
“terminated with extreme predjudice” – what does that even MEAN?
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Toad all the above examples the cases were referred to Work and Incomes Legal/Fraud departments and the advice back was “There is nothing we can do”.
BTW this was in a rural area (one of the zones later defined by Work and Income that you had to prove you had long term ties to the area before being able to move in and collect welfare) and she we working in a specialised area with no similar employers in the area so the argument that there was an expectation of easily available work isn’t valid in this case.
Agree in regards to the deadbeat dad situation however the bigger problem was women who simply refused to declare who the father was. If the Father was known then the IRD automatically collected the required amount and could deducted it directly from the wages if required however in many cases the women invovled simply wouldn’t advise us.
Now the typical answer about why Work and Income can’t push for this information is that its to protect the victim of child/sexual abuse however this argument is crap. All it does is a) provide the means for the system to be abused and b) (The more important reason I feel) it protects the offender in genuine sexual/child abuse cases as it means that all they need to do is put pressure on the women to ensure that they don’t get reported.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Deadbeat dads: duplicate of another post Toad? My comment there was that allowing dads to have some time with their kids might improve the number who are “deadbeat.” United’s shared parenting policy (someone else had one of those – was it Muriel Newman in ACT?) makes sense, and would probably help.
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
yep, it was Muriel Newman in ACT, PaulL. And you are exactly right, every time there is a groundswell of anti deadbeat dads opinion, the “family” agencies (stacked with secular leftist anti family activists), divert it into yet more punitive measures against dads who have been FORCIBLY separated from their children against their will. Where has D4J been, is he banned? He’d tell us all about it.
The lonely crusade of Muriel Newman and one or two other politicians is just tragic. Bringing due process and human rights to detained Al Quaeda operatives is a movement getting millions of man-hours and millions of dollars worth of legal activism from Lefty lawyers. But Dads, nah, not even on the radar………
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
georgina can offer the perverts in australia a MALE /female bonk, its talent limite
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
georgina can offer the perverts in australia a MALE /female bonk experiance,THE KIWI EXPERIANCE its/her/his talent limit, their loss, our gain if you dont want a winDging transexual fit for nothing moaning that she/it /him didnt rip us off enough,
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
The facts she’s a transsexual has absolutely nothing to do with this. The issue is her apparent sense of entitlement. Disgraceful. And to think she was a member of parliament…
Vote:August 15th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
“Georgina is just the first Labour whinger who is out of a job.
There will be 20-30 more come November 9th”
Is that the date thats been set??
Vote: