Paula Bennett's second strike (not since Whaleoil has someone been so blatant)
Minister under fire again on privacy
A request for a cash settlement to resolve a privacy complaint against Cabinet minister Paula Bennett suggests the politician could have been at fault, a top privacy lawyer says. John Edwards, who has been a privacy lawyer for 20 years and helped set up the Privacy Commissioner's Office in 1993, says Ms Bennett may have breached privacy rights again in disclosing details of the request. Ms Bennett revealed the contents of a letter she received last week from the commissioner's office, when asked by the Herald if there had been any progress on the matter.
Not since Whaleoil has someone so blatantly broken the law. As I pointed out yesterday, the Minister has once again breached privacy by revealing the negotiation process between the Minister and the Privacy Commission.
Now seeing as the 3 strikes law was passed this week, that means in a sign of good will and to prove this ludicous assertion that harsher penalties for repeat offenders will do anything more than make Prisons even more dangerous meaning double bunked prisoners will become ticking timebombs minus the moderating influence of parole, to prove that assertion is true, Paula should face a second strike for her blatant breach of privacy. So $15, 000 for the first breach and at least double that for her second breach? $45 000 all sounds about fair doesn't it folks?
Why is Bennett being allowed to do this? The legal advice internally must be pointing out that every time Bennett screws Tarsha over in the media the cost is rising, the political calculation must be that portraying Bennett as an aggrieved Minister being forced to hand over taxpayer money to a dirty filthy solo mother is just further proof of how much change is needed.
Abuses of human rights in NZ in this manner must have been the reason why the National Party circumvented the usual selection process for the Human Rights Review Tribunal and elected to put a homophobic bigot like Brian Neeson on it. Bigots aren't that fussed over rights at the best of times.
The ultimate irony here is that Paula Bennett herself benefitted from the very education allowance Tarsha was complaining about having cut. What was the benefit amount paid to Paula Bennett? Oh she refuses to make her allowance details public, isn't that rich coming from a Minister who was more than happy to against the law, release the personal privacy details of two women who had dared to speak out for the sole purpose of political point scoring with a talkhate radio bennie basher audience baying for scapegoats as the economy stalls?
Bennett will be forced to pay a LARGE amount and she will use it as an excuse to make changes saying her hands are tied when the uninformed public backlash kicks in an demands 'changes' which Paula will claim mandates her new round of draconian Welfare Panel inspired slashes.
It's all so fucking predictable.