The boarding house didn’t cause the baby’s death.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/93507253/police-investigate-suspicious-death-of-baby-boy-born-at-a-boarding-house–who-died-just-days-later
This article seems to imply this baby’s death was related to the conditions of the boarding house but given it is under the crime section of the news and it says the baby died of suspicious circumstances I think the child being in a boarding house is not not the problem but having bad parents. Doesn’t matter if you live in a mansion, if you have parents who are abusive, or abusing drugs or alcohol, then you have kids who are at risk and vulnerable. The reason it’s often the poor kids who get into these situations is if you spend all your money on drugs and alcohol you are more likely to be poor. Over the years I’ve heard many a story of rich people who lost all their money due to their addictions. 

Firstly, when you live in a boarding house you are not in a financially stable position and you should not be having a baby. Secondly, this boarding house is in Favona, South Auckland so medical care is easily accessible. I used to know a lady who was a midwife at Middlemore Hospital, a hospital in South Auckland. She said so many woman didn’t seek out medical care and just showed up at hospital to give birth and this made life difficult as they didn’t know the history so couldn’t predict risk factors. Midwife care is free in NZ so there is no excuse not to take up this offer and it is likely that this person didn’t use midwife care because why would you choose to have a home birth in a boarding house where there are fleas when you could choose a hospital where they would treat her for free. Surely a midwife would advise against birthing in a boarding house. The problem with not seeing a midwife is you don’t get scans, so you don’t know when the baby so due and there are risk factors with a baby that is born prem and potential health issues when the baby doesn’t arrive 10 days after the due date – which is when they would normally induce if baby hadn’t arrived. The scan also checks if the child has any anatomy issues as they may need treatment after birth and checks to see if there are twins. Blood tests throughout the pregnancy check for diabetes, pregnancy diabetes is common and there are risk factors for baby and mum so this needs to be monitored. Preeclampsia is also a serious medical condition that can harm mum and baby so a midwife watches for these things. Lots of stuff can go wrong during pregnancy but the great thing is most of these risk factors can be managed under midwife care to result in a good outcome for mum and baby. Not getting midwife care has nothing to do with poverty, not only is it fully funded by government but they also give extra help such as referrals to HNZ to help get a house in circumstances like this when they are in a boarding house and they also put you on to Plunket after the birth who also ensure baby has the best start to life. For the first 6 weeks the midwife visits you at home. Any issues with the child would have been picked up if that had happened. If they’d don’t get proper medical care then it is their fault. Don’t link NZ with third world countries where they don’t have access to help. We have choices in NZ. We are lucky. Not only do we have prenatal care for free, we have vaccinations for free, Plunket help for free and free medical care for children under 13 – definitely not third world. We get so much help, it’s insulting to countries which woman don’t get the help they need when pregnant and afterz. To say we have third world, we have the best access possible, if people choose not to access it then it is their decision. A boarding house is not third world conditions either, third world is a tent, mud shack not your own room in a building.

The government isn’t to blame for this baby’s death. No matter what killed the child had it been born in hospital and under midwife care there would have been a much higher chance of survival so it is on the parents, not the government.

Criminals compensation should go to their victims or a crime prevention charity.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11873107
Phillip Smith killed the father of a boy he molested and now he gets a payout for $3,500 because Corrections wouldn’t let him wear a toupee because it’s his human right to wear a wig. When he used the wig to disguise himself to escape the country he should have lost the right to the toupee but no. Our soft touch justice system is paying him $3,500 for the indignity of not having his toupee, not wearing a toupee is nothing like the indignity he inflicted on his victim and their family. I’m disgusted that the taxpayer pays for this. He didn’t even use to wear a toupee so it’s not like he hadn’t been seen without one.

Why are we so relaxed with evil criminals? Why are we so lacking in respect for victims? Why do criminals have more rights than victims? Who pays for them to sue? The money should be confiscated for the victim, their family or for a charity that relates to the crime – something like Lifeline that supports others. We are paying to keep this guy fed, a roof over his head – he has cost us enough. I don’t want to see prisoners abused but not wearing a toupee is not abuse. The ruling should only determine if it’s against his human rights to see if he can wear in the future. This is mad enough, without backdating retribution for his imaginary hardship. Nothing he goes through will compare to his victim and their family’s suffering. We really need to show more respect to the victims of crime, not those committing crime.

Criminals deserve to be deported.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/93546658/deported-criminal-says-hell-join-a-gang-and-commit-more-crime-on-return-to-nz
Seriously, are we supposed to feel sorry for this guy because he’s getting deported to New Zealand when all his family is in Australia? The guy assulted someone causing their glasses to get embedded in their eye, hit someone with a golf club, hit someone in a face with a bottle, assulted a taxi driver then set his car – the possession that supports the taxi drivers family, on fire. You know who I feel sorry for? His victims! You don’t recover quickly from glass in the eye, can he still see? Can you imagine the pain his victims went through? Do they still have scars from their attacks? Or any long term injuries such as brain damage from being punched or hit with a golf club? And the guy thinks his offending is minor! I think the victim impact statements would show the offending was not minor. Was the cab driver okay to go back to work? You can understand him being scared to and if he did, how many days work did he lose from not having a vehicle? I’m hoping he was insured but he was still out the excess and loss of business insurance would be a lot for a cab driver so unlikely have that would just have to suck up the loss. He’d have to wait on the insurance payout and then wait on getting the trip metre and probably security cameras after that experience. Silao Sau doesn’t even sound sorry for his crimes. Its not fair on his family. Wrong! It’s not fair on the victims that he hurt and their families for him to stay in their country. He was a guest and he is no longer wanted. If Sau’s family want to be near him then they can move to Australia. 

I don’t want him in NZ. He clearly isn’t rehabilitated, he says he will fall back into crime if he comes to NZ. We should just have an island for these type of people that both NZ and Australia don’t want. I don’t want our people to be put at risk. But he is a citizen of our country so we have no choice. Australia has a choice and I salute them to protecting their citizens. Can we have this policy here?

Those who pay the most in tax miss out.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/rodney-times/93530872/gulf-harbour-school-on-a-mission-to-build-school-hall
This makes me angry. The decile system is plain wrong. Here we have a group of people who assuably pay the most tax as that’s what makes them a Decile 10 school, missing out. A school needs a school hall. They don’t have one. They should get one. Funding should never be based on the income of the parents and if it was it should be the opposite, those who pay the most for the service should get the most, not the least. We have these resilient kids missing out but they will still probably do better than Decile One schools because they learn if you want something in life you have to earn it. Money grows on trees in the Decile One zones. The parents at the high Decile schools work all week only to be asked to fundraisers at the weekend and to pay the highest fees. The Decile system needs to be scrapped. Every school should get the same amount of funding for a standard pupil and additional funding should be based on professionally approved need, like diagnosis of ADHD, autism or dyslexia for example. Fund on the need, not on the income. They try and fund the Decile One schools extra to make up for the shortfall of the parents but it will fail as the number one influencer on kids is their parents. They see how they live and if they see work hard and achieve, that’s what they will likely follow. If they see don’t bother and get given, then that’s the path they’ll likely take. Throwing money at Decile One schools won’t achieve the goal they desire so make the system fairer. Stop one group of people paying three times over (taxes, fees, fundraising) for a service that others get for free. It maybe that this school would still need to fundraiser to get their school hall even if there was fair funding, but you don’t mind fundraising to fill the shortfall, it’s a different story to fundraisers because you are not getting your fair allocation of funding.

Government funded homes with cleaners?

http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/93195780/hamilton-motel-gets-more-than-200000-from-taxpayer
One of the biggest expenses of going on holiday is accommodation – especially as we are a family of 7 as even though we don’t mind sharing beds or using airbeds motels have a limit of people per room so we often need to book 2 rooms – annoying when you have the adults in separate rooms but normally we have managed to get adjoining rooms. So because this is such a big expense for us, it makes me angry to read that the government spends huge amounts of money housing people in motels. In a motel you get someone come in every day to vacuum your floor and clean your bathroom – wouldn’t we all like that? I think it is extremely unfair that we are paying for people to live in motels. Do they appreciate this huge expense? No. This article shows that a motel owner estimates 40% of the state funded tenants damage stuff or steal stuff – that’s pretty high. They take a bond so keep taking them on taking them – the tax payer pays. It makes you question how many of them are not a result of a housing shortage but the result of being bad tenants http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/90013961/auckland-moteliers-speak-out-about-what-its-like-providing-housing-for-the-homeless. Damaging the property is just one form of being a bad tenant, there’s the non-payer, or the party tenant which the neighbours continually complain about.

Those using motels for accommodation are supposed to pay back their debt, but we know most of them won’t. Read about this family: http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/80094682/work-and-income-keeps-clients-in-dark-says-poverty-group. This family of 10 live in a one bedroom motel room, must be one of the few motels that don’t limit numbers of people per room. They have racked up a debt of $78,000. They were apparently cleared of drugs which kicked them out of the HNZ house in the first place but are still blacklisted, there must be a reason for that. The motel she is in now is her third, why do they keep getting kicked out? And even more concerning is they had two of their kids whilst living in the motel. There are people who fall on hard times and people who dig themselves into one and this family have put themselves in this situation. You would think it would be impossible to get pregnant when living in a one bedroom motel room with 6 kids. Both her and her partner are on the job seekers benefit – which is a joke. You are not looking for a job when you are constantly pregnant or breastfeeding, she had deliberately made herself virtually unemployable. Sue Bradford says they shouldn’t have to pay debts which is the governments fault but this is not the governments fault – they lost their house through bad behavior and then had more kids despite not being able to afford a roof over the heads of the kids they have. I have 5 kids and that’s expensive, to have 8 kids you have to be very well off to be able to afford them. This is entirely their fault. They should have to pay but the reality is I doubt they ever will.

So what’s the answer? I don’t know. It’s not fair on the kids of these irresponsible people but it is not fair on the taxpayer for them to be taking a bottomless pit of money. We have more deserving people on hospital waiting lists and money should be spent on health rather than paying for people that fail to provide for themselves even though they are healthy enough to do so. We need people to take personal responsibility. Society only functions smoothly if everyone plays their part.

Apparently houses do self clean.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/93483374/fresh-room-for-south-auckland-boarding-house-baby-julia
Apparently there is such a thing as a self cleaning house. After yesterday’s story the landlord came around and cleaned up their house for them, no more mould and new shelves. House is no longer overcrowded – there was only ever supposed to be two people in the house and Julia’s mum’s partner was not supposed to be there. Does that mean she was sharing a bed with the daughter and a man who wasn’t her daughter’ father? The landlord is going to do more regular inspections to make sure people aren’t breaking the rules and people have given them a whole pile of free stuff. Happy ending. I have mould that I’m too lazy to clean, but I own my own home, how do I get someone to come clean it for free? I guess I’m supposed to clean it myself or pay someone to do it. Guess I better go clean then.

Who wouldn’t want a government subsidized 5 bedroom house?

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/93428223/fearing-eviction-hnz-tenant-of-22-years-told-hes-not-suitable-for-the-property

A part of me feels sorry for this guy but another part of me feels it is selfish to hold on to a five bedroom state home when you have grown children. As far as the state is concerned, at 79 your kids should have all left home, not one stay and have 7 of his own kids and just expected the state to pay. I’m grateful to live in a country with a social security safety net. It’s important to help those who are unlucky in life such as those who have medical conditions or injuries which limits their ability to work or who are caring for sick family members, but at 79 and with grown children it is time for someone else to have the opportunity he was given by the state. They are not kicking him out onto the streets, they are saying he needs something a lot smaller as there are people raising their families who need the home – and he has had 22 years in his State home. As for his family, why do they think they have the right to essentially inherit their father’s home? It belongs to the state. 

I can understand him wanting to stay with his family but the reality is lots of people want that but can’t afford a home big enough. I don’t have 5 bedrooms and we could do with that since we have 5 kids but we live within our means. Why should they get a state subsided 5 bedroom home? Time for this family to start paying their way. Maybe dad had a valid reason for his inability to work and provide fully for his family but his son needs to step up and pay his own way and get off living off his dad and the state and if he must live off the state at least apply and do it without his dad’s help. He has 7 kids of his own, time to step up and provide for the family.

There are 43 families awaiting a 5 bedroom house in Auckland. Seems unfair that HNZ provide 5 bedroom houses when many can’t afford a 5 bedroom house but have enough kids to fill a 5 bedroom home. Sometimes it seems people have the kids just to be the most desperate, get the biggest house and get the most financial help. Unfair on those working to provide and being highly taxed for so many that don’t bother providing for their families and deliberately put themselves in a position where they have kids they simply can’t afford.

I wish houses would self clean, but they don’t.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/93141424/councils-cant-shut-down-dangerous-boarding-houses-fast-enough-as-homeless-kiwis-are-forced-into-houses-with-no-toilets-no-kitchens

I’m totally against slum landlords and this place does sound like a slum with fundamental problems, but a lot of the problems are caused by the tenants and they won’t fix unless the landlord kicks the people out. Carmel Sepuloni may have submitted the petition regarding better regulation of boarding houses but you can guarantee her motives are different to the neighbours who started the petition. The neighbours don’t want to live next to these type of people and want them shut down. The reality is most of the people here will have bad credit, criminal histories and rulings against them in the tenancy tribunal for the state they keep a rental in, no one else wants to rent to these people and definitely not at what they are paying. Anything decent will be a lot more. Get rid of the boarding houses and these people will be on the streets.

If you look at the list of complaints by the tenants, they are created by the tenants. The toilets probably weren’t ‘smashed to bits’ by the landlord. I feel for the KFC and petrol station they keep visiting to use their facilities, they provide – and clean, those for their customers. The house lacking doors and window panes could be the tenants fault or the landlord and it doesn’t say what happened to the stove – wear and tear or abuse? The filth and chaos is the tenants. The burglaries of the neighbouring houses seem to be the tenants – according to the attitudes of the neighbours. Rubbish dumping, agressive dogs, public urination, vandalism, threatening behavior, bail breaches, people on bail, police visits and police being assulted – all the tenants. A faeces strewn bathroom – was a cleaning service provided as part of the agreement? I don’t know how this works in terms of cleaning but faeces should never be strewn around a bathroom, that is the behavior of pigs. The kitchen is covered in sticky grime which not surprising means flies – I doubt this cheap accommodation comes with a cleaner of the kitchen, assimably people should clean up after themselves.

Tenants give their cashflow cards to the Property Manager and trust her to take out the cash. The tenants are too lazy to take out cash and pay or set up an automatic payment – which can be done with by internet, phone or in person at the branch. Giving out a PIN number is against all banks terms and conditions – they can’t even follow the most basic of bank security procedures and this is completely irresponsible but these are Work and Income cards – so that means none of the people living at this accommodation work and the state is providing for them.

One of the people living there says fights break out rarely but they are normally domestics involving her and her partner, everyone drinks and there is some glue sniffing. A 14 year old lives there occasionally but doesn’t bother going to school and no one seems bothered by that.

I’m not trying to make excuses for the landlords here but who wants these people living in a property they own? Do you know how much it costs to replace a toilet? I don’t but an internet search showed me the cheapest toilet currently at Mitre 10 is $159. From experience I know a plumber costs at least $100 and that is just a call out fee – your costs add up fast when you have people busting up toilets. And it doesn’t sound like they clean up after themselves and they dump rubbish – this costs landlords a fortune when they move out. They are unemployed, drink and occasionally sniff glue – do you think your house – which is a huge investment is safe with these types of people? Who should house and pay for people who don’t work and continually damage the property they live in? Why should the taxpayer do it? We don’t smash up our houses because we pay to fix it – they don’t. Would you want to live near these people? Admittedly there are also some who get stuck in these places due to poor health or unfortunate circumstances but a lot are there because they commit crimes and can’t get anywhere else to live because they have a record of damaging homes and not paying. So if the review is successful and houses like this shut down, where do they go? I mean this one doesn’t match current legislation. There aren’t enough state houses and no private landlord wants to rent to them and why should more state houses be built for them to smash up and abuse when many home owners have issues with their houses they can’t afford and many renters pay top dollar and work extremely hard for what they get for free. I don’t know the answer but claiming these people are vulnerable is a lie. These are people who expect everyone else to provide for them whilst they disrespect the very community that pays for them. Please stop calling people who are the cause of the problem ‘vulnerable’. Vulnerable are those who are get sick, care for the sick or who are widowed not criminals and people who destroy their homes.

Complaining about cockroaches but leaving half eaten plates of food lying around (sigh).

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/93211462/18monthold-julia-the-innocent-face-of-modern-nzs-brutal-archaic-boarding-houses?cid=facebook.ad.June
The biggest problem with boarding houses is the people. Other than the mould on the roof which could be a building issue, or the tenants never opening their windows, the issues of blood on the carpet, beer bottles in the hallway are because of the tenants. It is a low cost accommodation, a cleaner isn’t provided, you have to clean up after yourselves. I would like to say it is possible that this family is a victim of others bad behavior and is not contributing to the problem but the half eaten plates of food stacked high on boxes is going to help feed the cockroach problem. No point the landlord getting the exterminators out, at great cost, if people are going to leave food out for them it will need to be done again as soon as the poison coating has warn off. The fleas are likely coming in from pets, so again, unless people either don’t bring pets in if they aren’t allowed, or treat their pets for fleas, the problem will keep spreading.

To claim living in a boarding house is just as bad as a car is a joke. I would rather be in a boarding house than a car – why? Well firstly, you can lie down flat and sleep in a bed. We lived in a multilevel building overseas where there was a lot of rubbish and sometimes dog pee was in the lift – it stunk, but it was cheap and we were saving for travel so we just put up with it. We slept on an air mattress for over a year, but it was cheap and that was all that mattered. You get what you pay for and when you don’t pay a lot you are going to get people who are often criminals or unemployed because it’s all they can afford. Best thing to do is to work harder and get out – we did. I wouldn’t want to be staying at a place like that with kids.  

Shared facilities bring down costs. It’s still better than a car where you’d have to get out and get wet if it’s raining to use a public bathroom and unless near a beach or at a campsite they don’t have showers. I had my honeymoon at accommodation that had shared bathroom toilet facilities, campsites and are the same, it’s fine as long as everyone is respectful of everyone else. Again, you get what you pay for.

Despite the claims of it being a hellhole, if you look at the picture the hallways seems clean, it’s their house which is the pig sty and they have mats on the floor. If they don’t have mats on the floor then it is less likely the fleas will get into their room if it is floorboards underneath.

They say Julia is ‘explorative’ and they worry about her when she runs out of their room. No kidding! Every parent worries if their 18 month old walks out the door. When she does that, watch her. Or get a child proof latch – these can be stickered on so no damage to the property – which is up high so their 18 month old can’t reach it. Seriously, it is a parents job to protect their child, protect them!

My baby sleeps in my bed. All my kids did, they like being around their parents, nothing is wrong with an 18 month old sharing their parents bed.

The mum has a job now so things will improve but let’s be honest, when you have a 18month old at 21 you are going to struggle. This is why I waited until I was financially secure to start a family and I certainly wasn’t at 21 so waiting was what was best for our family. People need to stop blaming the government. They can’t be responsible for everyone’s bad decisions.

Media lies

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11868428

This article makes me intensely angry. It is not about poverty but poor parenting.

Sueanna claims that she did not have the money to pay for the medication for her child and could not get her to the doctors because they didn’t have a car. My kids have asthma too and the Ventolin inhaler they have is free and doctors visits are free for under thirteens, so cost should not have been a barrier to this child not having medicine. It’s possible Ventolin didn’t work for her and she had to be on something different which isn’t funded by Pharmac and maybe that did cost $20 but to say she couldn’t get to the doctor because she didn’t have a car? She’s from Glen Innes. They have access to public transport. I have a friend who works as a public health nurse and part of her job is taking sick kids who don’t have transport to hospital appointments so I’m sure there would have been either a service or friend who could have got her to the doctor. An Uber or taxi would have been cheaper than letting her get sick enough for an ambulance Maybe she didn’t even need to see a doctor, my son had epilepsy and when his meds ran out I just needed to ring the doctors and they could fax the script to the chemist. Once a year he needed to be seen and that was for blood tests as the meds can have a side effect for his liver so we needed yearly blood tests, but for asthma maybe the doctor could just do a script and fax it to the chemist of their choice, then anyone could pick this up for them. Letting it get to a point that she needed an ambulance to hospital is just insane. That is a life threatening situation. Some people need an ambulance despite taking the meds as it is not working but not taking the medicine puts a strain on an already overstretched system, complete irresponsible. And the cost of an ambulance is $60, and it says she was going every month. It would have been cheaper to get her to the doctor and get treated than paying a monthly ambulance fee when the condition becomes life threatening. Just disgraceful that they didn’t help her get better. You can also avoid the ambulance fee by being a St Johns  supporter. It’s $80 for a family http://www.stjohn.org.nz/Support-us/Join-our-Supporter-Scheme/. I’m a member and we renew it each year, even if I don’t need an ambulance it’s a charity I want to support. You never know when you are going to need an ambulance to help you. When you don’t give your child their medication and they have asthma it is pretty much a given that they will need an ambulance. Neither asthma or eczema are poverty illnesses – anyone can have them. In general they can be controlled with medication, if you bother to pick it up and take it. Often there are certain food triggers, for me it was dairy and egg. So when my eczema or asthma were playing up I advoided these foods. Just being sensible helps a lot with some conditions for most people, of course others have severe cases and won’t be able to avoid hospital no matter what they do. 

The families income is more than $250. 2 adults and 6 kids, they would definitely be getting an accommodation supplement on that or have a State house. That’s at least an extra $500 per week, most likely more, Glen Innes is central Auckland and they need a big house. So at an absolute minimum it’s $750 per week. That’s $39,000 that the NZ taxpayer is paying, not including the additional health costs incurred by them not taking their medication.

Dad couldn’t work after injuring his back and then after four years off work he hurt his ankle – and why can’t mum work? Yes, there is 6 kids to look after, but dad isn’t working so he can do that. It doesn’t say how bad his back is but it wouldn’t need to be that bad to stop him working as a furniture remover however he might be able to have a job less physical – bus driver, call centre worker – I know at the call centre I used to work at we had standing desks for those with back problems, maybe he needed to consider a career change. And if he injured his back at work then he would have been getting ACC which would be more than the $250 a week sickness benefit. Minimum wage is $15.25. So assuming minimum wage if he was a full time worker he would have been earning $610 per week, so 80% of $610 is $488 – that almost double what they say they are getting, so this just isn’t adding up. Incidentally, even if he hadn’t been injured, that is not enough to have 6 kids, they live the way they do because they choose to have 6 kids rather than stopping at a number they can afford.

The fact that they haven’t needed the ambulance for three years since they started taking their medicine just goes to show how dangerous it was choosing not to give the child her meds as this would have kept her healthy. They put her life in danger.

The government are already giving so much to these people, in some countries people get no help. The minimum dontation to Variety is $45 per month. This is what I pay to World Vision for my sponsored child in Cambodia. This money gives him an education (which we take for granted here), is funding the village to have clean water, toilets and sanitation (again, something all NZer have), to teach them how to grow their own food and to manage their own farms – it works with the community to become self sustainable. The children who are sponsored by World Vision are in poverty. NZ citizens get sufficient money to survive from the government and we have so many opportunities here. Some people don’t know how lucky they have it.