MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Rich irony in PM’s family friendly photo op

Filed under: General — JohnPotter @ 10:13 am Sat 9th April 2005

Press Release: New Zealand National Party
Judith Collins MP – National Party Families Spokeswoman

Rich irony in PM’s family friendly photo op

National MP Judith Collins regrets that she will be unable to attend the launch tomorrow of a Families Commission survey because she’s “too busy being a parent”.

“I am pleased that the Families Commission has found an opportunity to give the Prime Minister a friendly photo opportunity. It is just a pity they’ve chosen to launch the programme on the day most parents, including myself, are tied up with their children’s Saturday sport.

“It’s just as John Tamihere said this week and goes to show how out of touch Helen Clark and Labour are when it comes to family issues.

Commenting on the launch of the ‘What Makes Your Family Tick survey’ Ms Collins says, “National believes the families of New Zealand want action, not more reports from Labour-appointed bureaucrats.

“Between July and December last year the Families Commission spent nearly $13,000 accommodating staff. It spent more than $36,000 on travel over the same period. It has a total budget of around $30 million.

“The Commission is spending millions of taxpayer dollars, and so far there is very little to show for it.

“Labour isn’t even doing the basics. Only a third of liable parents believed to be living in Australia are being chased for payments, unpaid child support has ballooned to nearly a billion dollars and more and more children are being placed in CYF care.

“Tomorrow’s thinly-veiled PR stunt is unlikely to convince the overtaxed and over stressed families of New Zealand that further social engineering is the answer,” says Ms Collins.

12 Responses to “Rich irony in PM’s family friendly photo op”

  1. Peter Burns says:

    Please explain to me how our PM claims to be happily married for 23+ years? Why does her husband visit gay bars in Christchurch then? What would that bitch know about a normal family with mum / dad & the kids. She has surrounded herself with homosexuals as she struggles with a deep hatred and mistrust of men. She has taken on an overly aggressive and rigid style of relating to all hetro-sexual people especially Fathers. She has broken many relationships between men and women ,between parents and children with her sick agenda. She must go! —dad4justice.

  2. Kai O'Donnell says:

    I’ve visited a ‘gay bar’ and this has not made me homosexual – if these supposed visits to gay bar actually happened, I imagine it might be possible that this man was in there waiting for friends, having a drink, or any number of other activities which he would think reasonable without having to prove his ‘manliness’ by some anti-social means.

    It’s this kind of hate-filled rhetoric that damages the cause claimed in your signature, “dad4justice”.

    It probably doesn’t help to suggest that many men, as homosexuals, are also fathers, and probably the butt of far more discrimination than the kind you rant against.

  3. Morris lindsay says:

    I will keep saying this until the Governments recognise that Child Support forces the Principal Income Earner (mostly men) away from their children and hurts these poor kids in many many ways.

    Why, why, cannot we have a FAIR system for “CHILD Support”, rather than Government Support?

    The Governments who condone the method currently used to calculate the so called child support are guilty of child abuse. The parents suffer financially, but in the long run, the children suffer even more in both the short term and the long term.

    I say, STOP overtaxing the already stressed parents and STOP hurting the kids!!!!!. If I cant save, how do my children have a future?

  4. Peter Burns says:

    Dear Kai
    No doubt you will be able to explain to me why a certain authority had to be called off trying to stop the PMs husband from visting the public toilets at Christchurch’s Hagely Park. I believe the PM made a phone call to halt & hush the matter but no doubt that behaviour is acceptable to you.Save our children -dad4justice

  5. Mark Lloyd says:

    And no wedding ring in the photo of course. 23 years happliy married my arse. My wife and I laughed at that especially since there was a news item a while back where they attended a function of some sort and shook hands when they met. Show me a 23 year marriage where shaking hands is the public display of affection

  6. Ian says:

    Interesting posts thus far…
    Anyway am reasonably aware of what fatherless children go through being one of two brothers of a solo mum.
    Currently have two children whom I see only twice weekly, but am working on this.
    I have told the mother that it doesn’t pay to deny access and that I will win in the end as I am more in the role of a grandparent and naturally will make a event out of seeing them which puts me in a better light. So either I get the above situation or I get to be more involved with the upbringing side of things. Of course there is the hard part of not being able to provide balance etc but if the mothers allowed to endulge in a selfish culture then I guess it’s okay for me as the father to do so also but in a subtle way.

  7. Sparx says:

    I must concur with Mark Lloyd’s comments: if the situation were not so bad, it would be laughable.

    The reality is that there are children of 185,000+ separated families who are being hurt directly by the Anti-Clark and her public anti-child, anti-father, anti-family, anti-Church agenda. Her deviation from the sexual norm is well-known and documented (see Investigate magazine archives, November 2003 “The Seige of Helengrad”).

    Let’s see some real women and men (instead of all the funny girls and funny boys) running the country. By "real", I mean ones who are biological parents through the natural process (no turkey-basters, thanks) because it takes both a man AND a woman to make a child just as it takes a mother AND a father to raise a productive adult.

    People like the anti-Clark can never understand this because they have not been there.

    Get out Helen! Leave NZ alone. Parents and their children (who are future voters) have had enough!

  8. anon says:

    So vote National – the party that gave us The Domestic Violence Act and the Child Support Act.

  9. Stephen says:

    Hey anon,
    I don’t really repect as courteous and trustworthy someone who doesn’t identify themselves, but lurks in the shadows and snipes with sarcasm.
    What’s even more crass IMO is the comment you left in your post however.

    The problem’s not with the DVA and Child support Act. It’s how those acts are misused by fems and thier chivalric lackies to batter men and chidren.

    Yours openly and proudly,
    Stephen Gee

  10. Sparx says:

    I agree, Stephen,

    either anon needs to grow some bollocks or take his opinion somewhere else.

    The CS Act is, in reality, reasonably flexible in that the Commissioner [of Inland Revenue] – the omnipotent David Butler – or his proxy has a level of discression which he chooses not to exercise.

    For example, in the case of an Administrative Review, the review “officer” simply provides a recommendation.

    The CS Act allows the Commissioner to accept or reject the recommendation. That the CS staff who enact such recommendations on behalf of the Commissioner do not have the intelligence to evaluate the decision before making it is, IMHO, the real issue.

    Having said this, the changes the Anti-Clark and her funny-boys are proposing to the CS Act will give the Child Support Agency (let’s not forget these CS people are not “real tax people”) far greater powers for the collection of [alleged] debt.

    For example, they will no longer require a judgement [from the Femily Caught] as proof of debt.

    This is just another example of the expression of the ingrained hatred the Anti-Clark has towards children, parents and the family unit.

    We do not need such badly damamged personalities running NZ. Bring back a “family friendly” New Zealand where the real family unit (Mum AND Dad, the children, aunts, uncles, grand-parents, nieces and nephews) is properly valued.

    Helen, take your funny-boys and funny-girls and leave the real people of New Zealand alone. We neither need nor want your petty hatred as a part of our lives.

  11. Rohger says:

    Helen Clark is a fringe-arse Castro-loving heterophobe who pushes marxist ideologies and doesn’t give a fuck about mainstream NZ. The only thing she’s done well is promote herself at the expense of us. Her lesbo leftist lip-service doesn’t mean shit to the hard working people of NZ.

  12. I have been reading various comments as I had a traumatic access problem over many years.This involved false allegations of sexual abuse and cost me thousands of dollars let alone all else.
    I wouldn’t delve too deeply as the perpetrator has deceased.
    I can tell you I don’t see or hear from my daghter, now 25 years old who lives in Upper Hutt as far as I know.
    I am concerned about an incident that occurred about 18 months ago and have become aware of the opinions emailed of a person to this website.
    Should you like to hear more do email me back.
    I do not waqnt any of this content published.

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar