Thursday, September 6, 2012


One really has to admire the twisted logic (or is it 'Chutzpah') of those apologists who would argue that it is beneficiary bashing for the Government to announce that those beneficiaries with outstanding arrest warrants will have their benefits withdrawn.    Sue Bradford would be proud of you.

What part of 'action (or non action) produces consequences' don't these people understand?     

8.000 beneficiaries with outstanding arrest warrants (out of 16,000 nation wide) is an alarming statistic.    On one hand they are thumbing their nose at the justice system while holding out their other for taxpayer support.   

Sorry folks ... you can't have it both ways.   Congratulations to Paula Bennett for having the 'balls' to do what is right.    Dollars to donuts that Labour, driven by the Greens, will reverse this if they ever get their grubby paws on the treasury benches.


Anonymous said...

It's called entitlements. People are entitled to other peoples' money, irrespective.

We've been steeped in this group-think for decades.

Mrs Danvers

The Veteran said...

Well put Mrs Danvers ... and at last a politician with balls decided to act.

Noel said...

When you say 8000 out of 16000 is the latter the total number of outstanding warrants?
i.e. the other half are not beneficiaries?

Anonymous said...

Given people who have an arrest warrant have yet to be convicted I see both legal challenges and the odd wrongful action from this.

The Veteran said...

Noel ... yes.

Anon 1.21 ... the Warrant to Arrest is just that. It is a legal document, issued by the Court, instructing the Police to arrest.

The Police cannot be challenged in Court for doing what the Court has instructed them to do.

Anonymous said...

The standard are frothing suggesting that this is both an excellent political and regulatory move,