Meet the Bludgers

December 22nd, 2009 at 9:31 am by David Farrar

Colin Espiner reports in The Press:

Information obtained by The Press shows and her husband, former gang leader , have claimed unemployment and sickness benefits continuously since 1984.

25 years without working.

They are one of about 300 couples who draw about $1000 a week in benefits from the taxpayer and are the subjects of a government audit.

So why work if you can get taxpayers to give you $1,000 a week?

They have four children, three of whom are also drawing benefits.

What a surprise! What I can’t work out is how they get $1,000 a week, if at most they have one dependent child.

In addition, they have received $30,000 in special-needs grants since 2000, including $16,000 in the past two years.

Life must be tough on $1,000 a week.

Among the successful applications were grants to put new tyres on the couple’s 2007 silver Chrysler saloon and to fence a swimming pool at one of several properties the family owns in Christchurch.

Well the silver Chrysler must look its best, so of course the taxpayer should pay for new tyres. And if you own multiple properties, then again the taxpayer is who should pay for fencing the swimming pool.

Recent efforts to cancel Darryl Harris’ sickness benefit failed after he obtained a medical opinion stating he was addicted to cannabis.

Sadly, he probably is. But people can beat addictions – and I don’t see a lot of incentives for him to do so.

The opinion was from one of Work and Income’s “designated doctors” after the agency appealed against a medical opinion that Harris was suffering from “stress and anxiety” over being work-tested.

Oh the poor baby. He hasn’t had to work for 25 years, but the stress of being work-tested in itself made him so stressed out he was not able to work.

This year Marcia Harris was ordered to repay some benefits granted by Work and Income, including one to pay for her car to be released after being impounded. She was driving without a licence at the time.

Well that is hardly her fault. Society is to blame, so only fair us taxpayers pay.

Work and Income paid for the family to spend 10 nights at a Christchurch hotel, the Towers on the Park, in 2007 after their Islington home burnt down, a review of the family’s case found.

I am sure the burning down was a freak of nature, and had nothing to do with gangs. Hopefully the Towers on the Park was adequate for them It is only 4.5 stars and they may have suffered from it not being a five star hotel.

Since then the family has been transferred to a special “remote monitoring” unit. The unit deals with Work and Income clients deemed too dangerous for face-to-face meetings with staff.

If they are too dangerous to meet with staff, then maybe they are too dangerous to receive $1,000 a week?

Bennett said she planned to introduce pledges made by National during last year’s election campaign but shelved this year because of the recession.

They include work-testing for domestic purpose beneficiaries whose youngest child has turned six, compulsory budgeting advice sessions for beneficiaries who claim frequent grants, and part-time work obligations for some sickness and invalid beneficiaries.

The Government plans to suspend or reduce benefits for those who refuse to comply with requests to attend work interviews or take up work opportunities.

Can’t happen quickly enough.

Tags: , , ,

79 Responses to “Meet the Bludgers”

  1. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    “You’re better off with Labour!”

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 79 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    The bottom line on this seems to be that there are some very flawed policies and procedures in place at WINZ, and that there is also a staggering lack of accountability.

    Someone has been signing off on this for a long time.

    Who??

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 105 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. reid (16,223 comments) says:

    The Herald story sounds like they used an inside source which raises the question, why don’t we legislate to make it compulsory to publish every beneficiaries name every quarter, listing all the income they receive?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Tassman (238 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 74 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. RRM (9,773 comments) says:

    OMG, I gave Redbaiter a thumbs up. It must be the festive season.

    Before all the BS starts, try to understand this leftie doesn’t vote left out of a desire to deliver this kind of lifestyle to layabouts. FWIW.

    If Bennett can rip into this sort of thing then good on her.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 67 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. nickb (3,686 comments) says:

    Exactly Red.
    As reid said, tax audit them as well- this family owns several properties an a 2007 Chrysler FFS, they are living the high life, most probably on drug money from gangs, with a nice top up from the kiwi taxpayer

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 54 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. homepaddock (435 comments) says:

    What message does this send to honest people, working hard for low incomes?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 85 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. nickb (3,686 comments) says:

    Doesn’t it fuck you off knowing that there are kiwi workers who are being made redundant, selp employed people whose work has tried up, and things are so bad for some of these people that their kids are going to go without this christmas?

    And yet scum like this can opt out of the system with such large assistance from the fuckwits at WINZ, and get an income most kiwis would dream about.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 74 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Brian Smaller (4,037 comments) says:

    The bottom line on this seems to be that there are some very flawed policies and procedures in place at WINZ, and that there is also a staggering lack of accountability.

    Someone has been signing off on this for a long time.

    Who??

    Exactly. That person should be investigated.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Scott (1,765 comments) says:

    I couldn’t agree more DPF. It seems these people have bullied staff at work and income for 25 years to maintain their lifestyle of crime. The sad thing is that endless benefits, with no time limits, positively encourages idleness. If people have no need to work, the sad fact of the matter is that some people will not work. I don’t think you do people any favours at all by allowing them to stay on benefits for long periods of time.

    I think Paula Bennett is doing a great job and more power to her. All of the measures she is talking about I think make a lot of sense. Remember that it is taxpayers money, your money, which is funding their lifestyles. I cannot for the life of me understand why we pay benefits to people who can work, but refuse to do so.

    Also with regard to the addiction to cannabis and alcohol — is that a valid excuse for not working? Are we saying that if you smoke enough marijuana or drink enough alcohol, then you are excused from working? That doesn’t seem right to me — why should honest hard working taxpayers fund some people’s desire to smoke and drink and not work?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Tassman (238 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 40 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. KiwiGreg (3,247 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 45 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. transmogrifier (522 comments) says:

    Agree with red on this one. Another case of mindless bureaucracy ticking boxes and waiting for their lunch break so they can log on to Facebook.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. bchapman (649 comments) says:

    Isn’t this a police matter?
    She shouldn’t need to be making grand pronouncements if her department and the fraud office were up to the mark.
    Let’s see what she is doing to stop this happening in the future rather than making decisions by press release.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. transmogrifier (522 comments) says:

    Hell, they earn more than me a week, and I’m a high school teacher.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. big bruv (13,702 comments) says:

    How many Christchurch Labour MP’s knew about this and if they did how long have they known?

    It is all well and good to look the camera’s in the eye and say ‘we will get tough on welfare buldgers’ when they ignore the very worst examples.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    They don’t “earn” dick trans. They just GET more than any other three of us combined.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. wreck1080 (3,866 comments) says:

    I don’t understand how these harris’s get away with it.

    My father after working and paying taxes all his life, needed to go into a rest home earlier this year. Mum applied for the residential care costs, but, you get asset tested so they received nothing.

    So, while these harris’s committed a life time of crime and probably paid very little taxes they are award 1k a week plus a bunch of other stuff.

    But, my dad who worked and paid taxes all his life gets told by the government to fuck off when he needs a little assistance at the end of his life.

    Why aren’t the Harris’s asset tested? Surely they must pay their own way until the run out of disposable assets?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. bchapman (649 comments) says:

    Bruv,
    You may want to ask all C’church based MP’s the same question. Your party badge shouldn’t protect you.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Captain Neurotic (206 comments) says:

    DPF – I very much enjoyed your commentrary on this one!

    Not to get off topic, but WINZ is flawed in more ways than this! (I’m sure I don’t need to preach to the preachers).

    However, WINZ provide’s a working grant for those who are about to start a new job and require new clothes etc to help them start. A great initiative I think especially for those comming off the benefit into a job which requires a shirt/tie combo and some shiny black shoes.

    But – over the past 4 weeks I have seen WINZ give approx $2500 to my flat mates who have enjoyed buying a new suit (to add to their other two – but now they can have a grey one as well) new shirts, ties and another pair of shoes so they can have one pair for work and one pair for going out.

    These people are young lawyers and accountants who are fortunate to have parents who have bought them nice clothes and on top of this, their firms give them clothing allowances! But because they have just finished university they are entitled to the claim. I, myself was also entitled but have been playing the moral crusade game…. but I’m starting to think it is pointless given that there seems to be no point clutching to principles such as honesty and not being greedy.

    But the point is – All you really have to do is walk into WINZ and proclaim loudly ‘I need this!’ and they will be happy to write you a voucher.

    I’m rambling now – but it frustrates me!!!!

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. reid (16,223 comments) says:

    “What message does this send to honest people, working hard for low incomes?”

    Precisely the message that Liarbore insidiously engineered for nine long years, homepaddock.

    Turn to the govt, we will provide.

    One ray of hope though, I was listening to a traditional Labour voter talking on the radio yesterday. She said she’d become sick of the nastiness and venom exemplified by Hulun and this last time had voted and now supports National due to the completely different style exemplified by Key and the Cabinet – approachable, friendly, decisive, etc. Her Dad was a life-long Liarbore supporter as is her brother. Speaking to her brother the other day, he said that if Dad were alive, he’d be turning in his grave. She replied, if he were alive, he wouldn’t recognise the Labour Party he used to support.

    It’s true, isn’t it. The Lange-era Labourites had a tremendous sense of principle and even if some were seriously mistaken in their view of the world, at least they were honest. This bunch had and have no principle whatsoever.

    As the outcome of Liarbore’s hubris continues to crawl out of the woodwork, the scales will continue to drop from the eyes of all but their most fanatical supporters.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. transmogrifier (522 comments) says:

    Murray: yes, poor choice of words on my part.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. chfr (126 comments) says:

    It is scum like this that just make me sick. I have no beef with helping those in need, temporaraly, but this family are just taking the piss.

    I do have to wonder if this is because the staff at WINZ have been bullied by these vermin and now they are just so scared of them that they get what they want. If that is the case then sack the staff and start again, this time with people who know that a bully backs down when confronted.

    A few years ago I applied for a front line position at WINZ and was declined because I was too tough in my attitude to their “clients”. Maybe a few more like me and a few less yes women (and yes the only ones accepted from my trial were the weaker women) and this may stop.

    It is time these people realised that those of us who earn so they have their lifestyle may sharpen the pitchforks and run them out of town.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Guy Fawkes (702 comments) says:

    This story is indeed hard to believe. The Revenue should audit all their income/expenses. Whilst the majority will be cash, the most interesting feature will be the income source for the Houses and all that leads from it. They have taken the piss for too long. What understand is why the money isn’t simply stopped right away? They have to re-apply and declare all their assets.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    If you voted for Labour and wealth redistribution this is what you get. Money being taken from those who have earned it and being given to those who haven’t.

    A disproportionate degree of wealth possession is not, in itself, inherently wrong.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Psycho Milt (2,405 comments) says:

    If you voted for Labour and wealth redistribution this is what you get.

    Those Labour bastards! If only, Oh if only, we’d had a National govt sometime since 1984, they surely would have put a stop to things like this…

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. freedom101 (491 comments) says:

    We can blame Labour all we like for this mess, but what is National going to do about it?

    John Key has yet to make the transition from saying what people want to hear to governing the country.

    2010 will be the year when we find out whether he is Labour-Lite or is going to actually do something.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. david (2,571 comments) says:

    “wreck1080 (837) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 10:20 am
    I don’t understand how these harris’s get away with it.”

    I suspect wreck that it suited everyone to pay up and shut up. Certainly the Harriss’s are a bad bunch and would have easily soaked up $1k/wk in Police and Court time not to mention the cost to the state of putting them inside ($90kpa + benefit for the poor wee soul left on the outside with the cars and properties). To stop it means making a stand on princilple and it now appears that at long last we might have a Government that will do exactly that.

    Took long enough but watch out for a crime surge in ChCh when the gravy train rolls to a halt.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. s.russell (1,596 comments) says:

    “… the fuckwits at WINZ”

    This is unfair. If you read through the story you find that WINZ has been trying to cut the Harrises off, but have been stopped by the rules they have to work within.

    It is the rules, created by politicians, that are at fault. There may be other reasons to criticise WINZ staff, but anger should be focused where it is deserved here.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    ” if only, we’d had a National govt sometime since 1984″

    A typically dishonest comment that attempts to deflect attention from Labour’s assault on democracy by making as many people as possible beneficiaries and therefore making it virtually impossible for any party that promises to address the problem from being elected.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    I think Bennet is hot, hotter than Ms Rankin!!

    It’s a bit early for that. Anyone can point these cases out, but I’ll reserve my applause for when/if National actually do something to put an end to welfare dependency and abuse. Talk is cheap. Welfare dependencies and the corrosive attitudes which it inculcates is not.

    I don’t like the noises that have been made about a separate Maori welfare system. I want to see root and branch reform of the system we have. And a lot of the ‘entitlements’ need to go.

    It’s ironic that while helping many people who don’t really need help and are just bludgers, NZ does a very piss-poor job of looking after the much smaller minority of people who really do need help.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Tom Semmens (79 comments) says:

    It’s good to see the Christine Rankin MkII has found her Reichstag fire…

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 25 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. alex Masterley (1,507 comments) says:

    David @11.06,

    Your last sentence is an accurate assesment of what will happen.
    Sad but true.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    If only we’d had a bunch of left wing whinged assed bastards who all ruptured their nappies at the sligtest wiff of benefit reducation we could have prevented this sort of thing being exposed. Oh wait we bloody did untill just now.

    Is there a single day you don’t fawn religiously over the worst excesses of socialism mental case milt?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Razork (375 comments) says:

    Now the media really should dig a bit deeper and see where else the Harris family (gang) get their money from.

    Let’s just say it’s no coincidence that he has an addiction.
    The Harris family is very well known in ChCh.

    These are not just dole bludgers, they are criminals and we are paying for them.

    Vote: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Put it away (2,888 comments) says:

    Addicted to weed and been on a benefit forever and has no interest in working… sound like anyone we know ?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. queenstfarmer (770 comments) says:

    FTA: “The couple claimed they needed to sell the property and could not do so unless the pool was properly fenced.”

    WTF??? The general bludging is bad enough, but why in god’s name is the social welfare department giving these people a grant to fence a swimming pool on an investment property?

    It’s practically criminal. In fact, maybe the fraud squad should take a look at whoever signed that one off. I dread to think what other handouts are being made.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Fale Andrew Lesa (473 comments) says:

    Why is this some how Labour’s problem?

    State-dependency has been occurring for well over 100 years in this country, what have the National administrations done to prevent this or at least assist in its decline?

    Muldoon was an advocate for the welfare system if I recall correctly.

    If you read the above commentary correctly – the couple mentioned above have been earning tax dollars for just over 25 years. Has Labour been in office for the last 25 years?
    Was I on the moon for the last 25 years? Because I can recall a fair number of National-led administrations.

    What a huge surprise, a Conservative blog blaming Labour for 25 years of government hand-outs.

    You ought to be ashamed, this is National’s problem just as much as Labour’s and because National is the current administration we middle-ground voters expect John Key to act, not Labour.

    Do these welfare-dependents even vote at the general elections?

    The biggest welfare-dependents are Maori and Polynesians and ironically their also the two groups with the lowest turn-out during general elections.

    You’re better off with Labour?

    If you bother to vote, that is.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. dog_eat_dog (776 comments) says:

    Fale, your condascending tone does nothing to mask the fact that the past Labour administrations made it easier than ever for people to live off the state, which is far from addressing any of the problems you’ve mentioned. It’s a giant leap backwards.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. scanner (340 comments) says:

    Way to go, last time I looked smoking dope was against the law.
    The lifestyle these arseholes enjoy can’t be funded on $1K a week, perhaps if our police force had been doing their job this may have been solved a long time ago, instead they are munching donuts and handing out traffic tickets.
    Ch Ch has lived in fear of this family and their offshoot white power groupies for many years (20+), and what has happened, nothing yet again.
    Now we have WINZ too scared to deal with this lot and their standover tactics, so they just keep paying.
    The next question is how many more years would it have gone on for if the media hadn’t front paged it ?, I suggest probably for ever.
    Heads should roll, but it will not happen, WINZ will go into cover up mode faster than you can blink.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Fale Andrew Lesa (473 comments) says:

    dog_eat_dog

    Despite Labour making it “easier than ever” – successive National led administrations always held the power to make changes to our welfare structure.
    Quite frankly they have not done so and placing complete blame on former Labour administrations does nothing to remove the blood on their hands.

    There are fundamental flaws within our current welfare structure that have yet to be addressed, has National moved in the direction that we expect Conservative administrations to move towards in terms of welfare dependence?

    Don’t hold your breath. Their just as bad…

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. dog_eat_dog (776 comments) says:

    Labour have not repealed the 1984 reforms that apparently led to all this unemployment.

    I was already typing out that they’re just as bad as each other when I saw your last line :P

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Scott (1,765 comments) says:

    Fale you make some good points and it is hard to refute them. Welfare dependency has grown and grown for many years. I know that was one of Don Brash’s frustrations, how come with excellent economic conditions we still had a huge welfare roll?

    I think a government needs to grasp the nettle and actually reform welfare. As I said before it is neither kind nor generous to fund welfare payments to entire generations of families.

    Sadly I think the media is an accomplice in the rise of welfarism. Any hint of benefit reform has them crying foul at the drop of a hat. They seem to equate “compassion” with the government’s willingness to fund an ever expanding welfare state.

    I believe we need a government that encourages individual and family and community responsibility at the local level. Faceless bureaucracies in Wellington handing out if ever expanding wads of cash to ever expanding armies of beneficiaries is not the answer.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. dime (9,806 comments) says:

    addicted to pot? thats a scam in itself.

    fingers crossed they lose everything.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. RightNow (6,968 comments) says:

    reid proposes a good idea (9.42am) to publish quarterly the names and amounts of all beneficiaries. After all, they are being paid by us, I believe we have a right to know who is receiving our charity and how much of it they receive. This would also enable the public to help catch fraudsters.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Psycho Milt (2,405 comments) says:

    Is there a single day you don’t fawn religiously over the worst excesses of socialism mental case milt?

    I had imagined the idea that leftists are enthusiastic about criminals defrauding the taxpayer would be too stupid even for Kiwiblog commenters. Alas…

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. krazykiwi (formerly getstaffed) (9,189 comments) says:

    The true cost to taxpayers needs to include the years of benefit administration (case management, overheads etc), so this cost will be substantially higher that the net welfare paid

    Also, while we call our welfare state ‘a fair society’, most welfare exists only as thinly veiled attempt to protect people from the consequences of their own stupidity and/or laziness. It’s time we stopped that and made people bear those consequences themselves. Might be good for them, and for the taxpayers.. and the economy.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Grizz (591 comments) says:

    Stop Paying these Cunts. Simple!

    If they complain, tell them to take it to a judge and argue their situation in court!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Jack5 (5,007 comments) says:

    I suggest Grizz (at 2.32) volunteer as front-line WINZ staffer to deal with the Harrises. I’m bloody sure I wouldn’t.

    The Harris family is one of the country’s toughest. They long ran the Harris Gang in Christchurch, which could chew up and spit out gangs like the Mongrel Mob. No-one in Christchurch mucked around with them.

    The Harris boys’ patriarch had a small touring circus, and the boys grew up with lions and tigers, which they sometimes took out on leads. One escaped and caused a sensation around Kaiapoi a few decades ago. An elderly lady was ridiculed in the media when she reported she saw a tiger walking down the street early in the morning. Soon footprints turned up elsewhere. One of the Harris’s big cats had escaped when the young brothers were walking it on a lead.

    The Harris boys created fear in a few Cantabrians and schadenfreude in many others when, while in prison, they won a big lottery and with the proceeds bought a flash house in one of Christchurch’s most expensive suburbs.

    At one stage, after they were alleged to be running rackets from within prison, they were split up and moved to prisons around the country, away from their families.

    WINZ staff would do their job better if backed up by brawny, perhaps armed cops when they deal with the Harris family.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Brian Smaller (4,037 comments) says:

    Jack5 – I think denying criminal scum benefits in the first place is a good idea.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. lastmanstanding (1,279 comments) says:

    For the past 35 years the Nats and the Socialists have both lied to us in equal measure about how they were gunna clean up the welfare problem.

    They are all Gunnas Gunna do this Gunna do that Bennetts no different She will be gone in a few years the Harris family and all the others will still be collecting.

    Fact is the Gunna brigade lack the will the capacity and the capability to do anything useful.

    Too little Too late That all we get from NZ pollies and the Sir Humphries.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. reid (16,223 comments) says:

    Coincidentally the Herald also has a story today about a guy who rented out two properties he owned while living in a state house.

    Apparently, he defrauded us of $68,000.

    The maximum penalty for this is seven years inside.

    He gets five months home detention and 100 hours community work.

    Which makes me ask: WTF do you have to do to get anything like the max? This guy got 5.95% of the available penalty, and it was home detention, not prison.

    FFS.

    Several other questions spring to mind.

    Housing NZ said Wilkins lived in two state houses over a period of three years while he owned properties in Wiri and Papakura, which he rented out during that time. The $68,494 is the amount of money Housing NZ calculated Wilkins had received as rental subsidies over the three years. Housing New Zealand lawyer Dale Dufty said the authority would be seeking reparations through a civil court case. “There has been no offer of reparation and one might think that he has some basis to do so,” Mr Dufty said.

    So the judge hasn’t fined him anything, and now HNZ has to take a civil case against him costing no doubt much more than 68k, in order to recover a single dime. Who knows, the arsehole might even get legal aid.

    Secondly:

    Wilkins’ lawyer Maurice Coughlan said his client had suffered a brain injury in 1986. “It clouded his ability to understand fully what was going on at home,” Mr Coughlan said. Judge David Wilson, QC, said the brain injury was examined and a neuro-psychiatry report prepared for the court showed that the injury had a “mild to moderate” effect on Wilkins who also underwent tests. “But in five out of the eight measures, you performed in the normal range,” Judge Wilson said.

    So his fucking lawyer runs a bullshit defence about a fucking brain injury which required the taxpayer to pay for a neuro-psychiatrist’s report telling us the wanker was actually fucking normal after all and he wasn’t confused mental in any way, as if he ever was in the first place, you prick.

    FFS, again.

    Just another example of meaningless bludging bullshit that this fucking country is required to put up every fucking day of the fucking week but you know what?

    IT WOULD BE NICE IF THOSE WHO HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT; E.G. JUDGE DAVID WILSON, Q.C; ACTUALLY FUCKING DID DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT NOW AND AGAIN. WHO THE FUCK DO YOU THINK IS PAYING YOUR FUCKING SALARY MR WILSON AND DON’T YOU THINK YOU OWE US SOMETHING IN RETURN FOR THAT AND FOR YOUR NICE TAX-FREE PENSION? A BIT OF “DO YOUR FUCKING JOB PROPERLY” WOULD BE A FUCKING START.

    Fuck I’m real glad I’m not an MP because not being able to criticise the judiciary would be a real c**t sometimes.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Manolo (13,517 comments) says:

    I don’t believe this government has the political will (read balls) to undertake a serious reform of the welfare state.

    The National Party, as Labour before, will maintain the status quo, will do a bit of investigation here and there to curb excesses, but will never rock the boat and reform the entire system. NZ is condemned to be bled by a legion of bludgers.

    It would be marvelous if Paula Bennett had the courage to ask Lindsay Mitchell to be her advisor and implement some of her radical ideas. If only.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. reid (16,223 comments) says:

    Jack5, schadenfreude means “taking guilty pleasure in others misfortune” e.g. smiling when someone slips on a banana skin.

    I hardly think that describes other’s thoughts when Harris members won lotto.

    Anyway, on that, what’s wrong with destroying them with IRD audits and proceeds of crime? Do what we should do with every single one of the 5% that commit 95% of the crime.

    If they choose to claim any violations of civil rights then use the awesome power of the state to tie them up in court and deny them legal aid to fund any such claims until they and every member of their family have absolutely no assets and they turn up in court wearing nothing but barrels. Meanwhile, persecute and hound the fuck out of them at every turn. Have police turn up at their houses at 4:00 AM every single night and turn it inside out then come back and do it again the next night and the next and the next and next and next.

    Fuck them and everyone who gives us (society) the fingers. Take our country back. We’ve tried the Mr Nice Guy approach, for decades. It hasn’t worked. Some of us aren’t surprised, others are shocked that such people haven’t responded to kindness, but some of us knew it wasn’t going to work, with these wankers. It’s a failed experiment, the failed policies of the 4th and 5th Liarbore govts. Time to recognise it, stop beating a tired old long-dead horse and move on toward a bright tomorrow full of decent happy and laughing faces with no bludging arseholes in sight.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Jack5 (5,007 comments) says:

    Reid posted at 4.38:

    …schadenfreude means “taking guilty pleasure in others misfortune” e.g. smiling when someone slips on a banana skin. I hardly think that describes other’s thoughts when Harris members won lotto.

    Reid, in my 3.05 post I was referring to the Harris gang buying a flash house in a top-price suburb with their lottery proceeds. That caused sniggers within the 95 per cent of Christchurch people living in lesser suburbs. Many of these people had a laugh about the well off citizens who woke up with the Harris gang as neighbours. That’s schadenfreude alright.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. reid (16,223 comments) says:

    Gotcha, thanks for that clarification, Jack.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Fale Andrew Lesa (473 comments) says:

    You hit the nail on the head with that one Manolo,

    Until there comes a time where a bipartisan approach is offered for the required reformation of New Zealand’s welfare system, it never will be achieved in full.
    One administration will make changes that are most likely to be altered or abolished by the next incoming government – that is what we have seen between Labour and National administrations. Sadly, National has failed to push for the required fundamental solutions (expected under a somewhat Conservative leadership).

    Perhaps a referendum will indicate the importance of this concern? Clearly both parties are afraid to make the big, sweeping changes – sometimes completely necessary for political progress.

    We don’t need short-term fixes, we need long-term commitments honoured by a bipartisan relationship between left, right and centre.

    Welfare was once a temporary hand up, under the last 25 years it has slowly become a long term, hand out based on greed, selfishness, corruption and the underclass of bludgers.

    I have had quite enough and I’m sure thousands, if not millions agree.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    Fale Andrew Lesa Says (5:25pm): “Perhaps a referendum will indicate the importance of this concern?”

    Haha, Fale. I hope that was a joke. Referendums are simply a waste of time and money.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Grizz (591 comments) says:

    Lastmanstanding:

    It is not hard to stop a benefit payment. A few strokes of the keyboard. You do not even need to be a frontliner, just a back office worker. I am not asking for a miracle new programme. Just a simple hold on all payments to this scum.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Fale Andrew Lesa (473 comments) says:

    tristanb,

    I acknowledge the financial implications that a referendum places on the government but you need to understand that sometimes referendums are the only way to show a consensual approval for big, sweeping change – especially concerning the welfare state of affairs.
    It is clear to me that both parties are dead-set against such dramatic reform because they’re afraid of how the constituency will respond, by indicating in a legally-binding referendum that the constituency supports reform to welfare we are more or less giving both parties the thumbs up to implement the required change.

    I know it didn’t work with the referendum on section 59, but it may have in a different light – it helped expose John Key’s inconsistent leadership and the government’s political weakness to act on the majority view of New Zealand. It may eventually help to dispose of this current administration.
    The only issue is the alternative, a shear number of New Zealander’s are unconvinced that Labour is the alternative option and so you have a case of “the current administration is the lesser of two evils” – until a huge political catastrophe of disapproval breaks out thus sending John Key’s government into obliviation.

    Either way however, our current welfare system no longer exists to provide temporary hand-ups in times of need (the original objective of its existence under Socialism), thus creating a demanding need for change and reformation.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    It is not hard to stop a benefit payment. A few strokes of the keyboard. You do not even need to be a frontliner, just a back office worker. I am not asking for a miracle new programme. Just a simple hold on all payments to this scum.

    They’d just take a case (using legal-aid) under the Bill of Rights Act.

    We need reform of the whole system. While interesting and infuriating, these cases are just a distraction. Treat the illness; not the symptoms.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. jcuknz (704 comments) says:

    Hang on a minute matie …. the family are probably living on the NZ equivalent of bread and water and need the $1000 a week to meet the mortgage payments on the properties they are reported to own. Funny how these stories have payment around $1000 a week, that family with 12 kids was just over, now this one is right on the $1K.

    >>>Welfare was once a temporary hand up, under the last 25 years it has slowly become a long term, hand out based on greed, selfishness, corruption and the underclass of bludgers. <<< The 'bludgers had nothing to do with it … it was the politicians looking for a handout to buy votes. Sir Roger removed the ability of politicians to feed their electorates with extra jobs on the Railways and other government departments so they do it with benefits of numerous kinds. People can rant and rave about it but it makes good political sense to make the country a beneficiary paradise and I'm sure everything was done for a good reason. The bludgers are simply the folk who take advantage of the lurks, like the well placed capitalist out for 'No. 1". In fact I'd bet that the family in question are good capitalists at heart if they have multiple properties to their name.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. peterwn (3,239 comments) says:

    Why can’t WINZ have a special interview room set up for tough clients – with a heavy wire grille between the WINZ case manager and the client.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Stuart Mackey (337 comments) says:

    peterwn (727) Says:
    December 22nd, 2009 at 8:16 pm
    Why can’t WINZ have a special interview room set up for tough clients – with a heavy wire grille between the WINZ case manager and the client
    **************************

    No point in that, because its not the WINZ worker that is being threatened, its their homes/children/partner. And yes, the crooks will go out of their way to find out these details because the payoff is so, evidently, large. Remember, time spent in reconnaissance is seldom wasted.
    I don’t think that some in this thread realize that crooks in this country are not always stupid or the lengths that they will go to.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. nostromo (29 comments) says:

    The problem isn’t the fault welfare system, or the labour govt, it’s the fault of Christchurch itself. The place is occupied by heathen peasants.
    If we knocked it down and ran over it with plows and made it into something useful half the problems would be fixed there and then. Oh yeah, and send all the plebs to the Chathams (we’d have to set up a few Macca’s for their food supplies but it would pay off in the long run).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. starboard (2,524 comments) says:

    nostromo (23) Says:

    December 22nd, 2009 at 9:47 pm

    fucktard.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. simo (150 comments) says:

    “What kept the financial system afloat at the height of the global crisis? Billions of dollars of drugs money, says a drugs and crime tsar.

    Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, says he has seen evidence that the proceeds of organised crime were “the only liquid investment capital” available to some banks on the brink of collapse last year. He says a majority of the US$352 billion ($489 billion) of drugs profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.”

    So……the banks are lending back to you and me with laundered drugs money? Te Mungies are now getting social welfare from you and me and interest payments on their capital at the bank, two wonderful diametrically opposed revenue generating concepts that make us all wonder why we work at all. Are Te Mungies smarter than the Bridge Corp and Hanover directors and understand working both sides of no-mans land, or are they just scum as they forever portray themselves.

    Its just about the money

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. bill hicks (100 comments) says:

    Most of the harris family are on welfare.Time for a full investigation on there several houses,the pool fence,the wheels for the car,the paying of there fines. the lotto win AND for paying welfare because HARRIS HAS A POT ADDICTION….Fuck working people have to pay for there pot….HARRISey I say

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Jack5 (5,007 comments) says:

    Just how tough it may be for front-line WINZ staff to deal with the Harris family is underlined in another report in the Christchurch Press, this time printed today (Wednesday).

    The report says Darrly Harris, whom it describes as “former gang leader”, was jailed in 1991 over the shooting of two Highway 61 gang members. The newspaper adds: “Subsequently, the police officers who prosecuted him had their houses torched and the Sydenham police station was burned down.”

    Perhaps WINZ needs to hire some SAS veterans.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. LilMiss (5 comments) says:

    This is disgusting! The fact that the family are receiving benefits has NOTHING to do with anyone else except for themselves and WINZ, sure they may not be entitled to what they are getting but I think that’s more of a fuck up on WINZ part than theirs. How would you all like it if every move you made was scrutenised and others sat and judged you?! I guess none of you have ever heard of defamation of character then huh?! Honestly all of you whinging about a family you dont even know personally makes me sick!!!

    GROW UP!

    Im pretty sure there are more important issues going on within NZ than this bullshit! Half of its
    probably a crock of shit anyways!!!

    [DPF: Umm, where does WINZ get money from for these benefits?]

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. LilMiss (5 comments) says:

    Well in that case DPF why create a blog for all to leave their opinions on if you are so clearly biased? I’m not saying it’s not wrong, simply stating that it is uncalled for to single out one family when this issue runs deeper. The Harris gang wouldn’t be the first family to commit benefit fraud now would they?!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Pete George (23,429 comments) says:

    Im pretty sure there are more important issues going on within NZ than this bullshit! Half of its
    probably a crock of shit anyways!!!

    Half of this happening would be bad enough.

    One of the most important issues going on in NZ is the escalating cost and entrenched abuse of benefits.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. LilMiss (5 comments) says:

    Did I say it wasn’t bad did I?! Just making the point that the media are a bunch of fuckheads that sensationalize everything and half of this story IS utter bullshit!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. krazykiwi (formerly getstaffed) (9,189 comments) says:

    LilMiss, stop having a hissy fit. The MSM sensationalise. That’s what they do. Did you protest so when they claimed 6-7m sea level rises and 100’s of millions of climate refugees? I suspect not.

    The story is a indicative of a welfare system that’s out of control, one that’s beyond our ability to fund it and, many would argue, and manifestly unfair on those who are trapped in a cycle of inter-generational of welfare dependency.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. LilMiss (5 comments) says:

    I agree that the welfare system is outta control, its crap that the NZ government funds so many people’s pure laziness and I think it is way too easy for anyone in NZ to get a benefit however instead of writing stories that defamate someones character how about the government actually get off their tax payed arses and do something about it?! I’m not having a hissy fit simply stating my OWN opinion which you obviously have an issue with hmm.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. starboard (2,524 comments) says:

    Wake up ya stupid bitch…the harris’s are scum criminals…they deserve nothing..they have made the lives of many in chc miserable…you sound like an apologist for the scum harris…are you related??

    [DPF: 20 demerits for calling someone a stupid bitch]

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. starboard (2,524 comments) says:

    big fucken deal…stupid bitch…your a dickhead…truth hurts…starboard signing off ..stick ya gay blog up ya arse.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. LilMiss (5 comments) says:

    Um if that was the truth then no it didn’t hurt dumb arse your the scum here, im good friends with one of them and that person doesnt go out and cause shit, doesnt even have a criminal record and you wanna sit there and tell me that theyre scum?! you cant say something like that when not all of them are “bad”. grow up you arrogant piece of shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. PThump (1 comment) says:

    LilMiss…..”This is disgusting! The fact that the family are receiving benefits has NOTHING to do with anyone else except for themselves and WINZ, sure they may not be entitled to what they are getting but I think that’s more of a fuck up on WINZ part than theirs.”

    Whaaaat ?? Are you serious ?? If they are not entitled to what they get, then they ARE scumbags. What part of ‘scumbag’ do you find hard to comprehend ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.