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

Judith Collins Accused of Sexist Hyprocrisy

Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 9:59 am Sun 19th January 2014

Media Release from the Mininstry of Men’s Affairs, responding to Judith Collins’ anti-union attacks as evident e.g. in the NZ Herald story “Minister softens over claims of rort in ACC workplace safety training” last week:

Minister Collins accused of hypocrisy

Judith Collins was today accused of hypocrisy for her position on ACC’s funding of CTU training of health and safety representatives that has not clearly been shown to increase workplace safety. Community group the Ministry of Men’s Affairs (MoMA) today accused Minister Collins of presiding over a hugely expensive system of protection orders even though there has never been any evidence that they protect people or reduce family violence. MoMA spokesperson Hans Laven said “In fact, family violence including murders appear to be provoked by protection orders and the Domestic Violence Act”.

“The Domestic Violence Act removes family and civil rights from parents, mainly fathers, and their children on the basis of nothing but hollow allegations. Those accused under the Domestic Violence Act are deprived of normal priniciples of justice such as protections against false allegation and conviction. The Act then allows the state to abuse children by ripping them away from loving parents and otherwise damaging the most important relationships in children’s lives.”

“While Minister Collins shows no concern that her family law system of injustice and child abuse continues even though it has not achieved any positive aims, she now wades in with a vicious anti-union attack because a programme attempting to increase the safety of NZ workers has shown unclear results.”

“It’s no coincidence that almost 100% of workers killed on the job in New Zealand are men while most adults treated unfairly in our family law are also men. Minister Collins’ contempt for NZ men shines through from her contradictory positions on these two issues.”


  1. Those precise facts in the article have been deliberately ignored and distorted by feminists and their cohorts like Collins. They do not give a damn about families, males or the issues that men face on a daily basis. Preferring instead to keep in place the biased, sexist and discriminatory status quo instead of doing what they are supposedly voted in for, to make laws unbiased and workable. Judy Collins is a disgrace and should resign.

    Comment by Whatmenaresayingaboutwomen Wmasaw — Sun 19th January 2014 @ 11:04 am

  2. The facts in the original comment are simple and to the point. Men are the ones who most commonly suffer death and injury in the work place. Men are the ones who are the most commonly condemned by the family court to be removed from having a meaningful input into their children’s lives by unsubstantiated accusations.
    The result is, as many teachers will confirm, that children suffer a lot from a lack of a male influence in their lives. The other result from the present anti men attitude of some in our society may be seen at any early childhood or primary school that is a lack of males in the teaching and caring professions. This “disease” is now spreading into the secondary school system.

    Comment by andreas — Sun 19th January 2014 @ 1:32 pm

  3. I am impressed with the online words on the ‘Taxpayers Union’. I have sent in my first tip of the private sector collecting billions while government ownership will cost taxpayers millions.

    In each year, it’s a $500,000,000 profit for the private sector which will grow as profit must grow and all is paid for by the tax payer.

    I actually thought the Taxpayers Union would be right wing. Oh, I hope I am mistaken.

    As for men’s safety in the workforce, is it possible to come up with something that gives greater benefit? 84 cents in the dollar waste is not good. Any ideas on how to save men’s lives that costs the taxpayer, but gives better reward for their money?

    Comment by Julie — Sun 19th January 2014 @ 3:26 pm

  4. The value of the programme is being judged on cost benefit analysis only, as seen by ACC accounts.

    In other words, the value of human suffering or loss of life appears to have been ignored. (These are private costs, so unless the dead workers sue the employer of Government, they will not be recorded.)

    In some cases, long term rehabilitation costs are born through the hospital system, after ACC has refused coverage and closed the ACC claim. Thus the observed cost benefit analysis by the Taxpayer’s Union almost certainly does not include costs through hospital system and privately paid rehabilitation costs.

    Many men will value their own life, but this is only academic after they have been killed or seriously incapacitated. Similarly, some families value their men being alive, for itself and for the roles that these men play in the family. These values have not shown up in the Taxpayer’s Union analysis.

    It is rather worrying that Minister Judith Collin’s has not detected these apparent flaws in the Taxpayer’s Union analysis and drawn them to public attention. It appears that she has just used this as a publicity stunt, maybe to draw attention away from other issues under her portfolio?

    Although I applaud the Taxpayer’s Union for looking into these issues, before critical decisions are taken, we need to check on the quality and completeness of analysis. It appears that neither Taxpayer’s Union or Minister Collins have done this.

    This incident is reflective of the generally poor quality of social policy analysis in NZ, through the last 50 years.

    Social policy analysis does take a lot of time and carry a significant cost. It needs to be based on good quality statistics. Then proposed policies need to be studied for effectiveness and perverse effects. If policies are rushed, the perverse effects costs can easily be greater than the expected programme benefits. The DPB is a textbook example of this risk.

    Other examples of disastrous policies in NZ are:

    Child support
    Leaky buildings as result of changes in Building Act
    DV Act

    The perverse effects costs of these policies probably exceeds $100 billion in the last 30 years. Considering these costs, leads to a conclusion that better policy analysis, discussion and debate before passing legislation would offer major benefits to our society.

    I suggest that we should be spending more on social policy analysis and discussion, by a factor of x5. The avoided costs of social blunders would readily pay for the research costs.

    There is more to good legislation, than just ideology, haste and good intentions.

    Through dangerous haste, we are our worst enemies.
    Nobody else does as much harm to NZers, as we do to ourselves.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Mon 20th January 2014 @ 8:46 am

  5. Ms Collins said the programme had “all the hallmarks of a rort” which “added very little for the money”.

    Reading Minister Judith Collin’s words, I keep getting bitten by the thought that she has added very little value for money herself, on this issue.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Mon 20th January 2014 @ 9:18 am

  6. The taxpayers union didn’t do the analysis. ACC did – the taxpayers union just brought it to media attention.

    Yay, that they got a nice win so easily. It will boost their confidence.

    Perhaps our Hollow Men, lol, want to work with the union rather than have them against them and Judith is just a puppet. They don’t want people rocking the boat and have lots of people on their payroll (to shut them up) who are wasting tax payers money.

    Yes, I believe in conspiracies.

    Comment by Julie — Mon 20th January 2014 @ 10:22 am

  7. Great stuff Julie. Of course you are not one of the gender who suffer almost 100% of workplace deaths each year so you can celebrate minister Collins’ vile attack on those who sought to make work safer, and her double standards in judging those efforts so harshly while turning a blind eye to the fact that her Family Court is totally unsupported by good outcome research.

    And I guess you won’t be encouraging the Taxpayers’ Union to blow the whistle on the family-wrecking DPB system which the research shows causes mainly social harm but which costs millions of times as much as the workplace safety promotion did.

    Comment by Man X Norton — Wed 22nd January 2014 @ 7:51 pm

  8. Beverley Boyle, Yvonne McDonald. Social terrorists.

    Comment by Soothsayer — Thu 6th February 2014 @ 8:22 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

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