|
Articles -
Corrupt and Fraudulent Practices
|
|
Saturday, 06 March 2010 07:47 |
|
A former government minister and Children's Commissioner has been charged with abusing his ex-MP perk of taxpayer-subsidised flights.
Roger McClay was to appear in Auckland District Court next Friday facing 56 offences of obtaining or using a document to obtain a pecuniary advantage, The Weekend Herald reported today.
Police refused to confirm the charges and McClay did not return telephone calls.
The paper revealed in December that the 65-year-old was being investigated for allegedly using his ex-MP perk of taxpayer-funded flights on business trips, then claiming driving mileage from charities he worked for.
During his 15 years in Parliament, until 1996, he was Minister of Youth Affairs and Associate Minister of Education and Social Welfare.
He was then appointed the Commissioner for Children, and in 2005 was made a companion of the Queen's Service Order for his public service and his contribution to the welfare of children.
He later became chairman of Keep NZ Beautiful and last year took up a position at the NZ Spinal Trust.
His son Todd is National MP for Rotorua.
Stuff |
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts)
|
|
Articles -
Your Rights
|
|
Friday, 05 March 2010 06:04 |
|
The face of this year's Brain Awareness Week has been blocked from accessing money in his KiwiSaver fund despite a serious illness.
Waipawa man Jason Napier, 24, was a retail manager in Wellington until he had a brain haemorrhage last year. Surgery in July cleared the haemorrhage, but Mr Napier continues to suffer seizures and cannot work or drive.
People who are suffering financial hardship, are seriously or terminally ill, buying their first home, or have moved overseas permanently are permitted to withdraw from their fund.
Mr Napier applied to do so in November, citing financial hardship, and was declined by Tower's KiwiPlan trustee, Trustees Executors Ltd. He then applied to withdraw his fund because of his serious illness.
His application included his medical notes and a letter from his doctor stating he would be unable to work in the foreseeable future.
|
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts) |
|
Articles -
Opinion
|
|
Wednesday, 03 March 2010 08:22 |
|
Changes to ACC pushed through Parliament under urgency two weeks ago means that every New Zealand employee will now have less ACC cover for workplace injuries, writes David Parker (Labour) in this week's From the Beehive.
More of the costs of being injured at work are being shifted to the injured person and taxpayers. The changes made to the ACC legislation will result in lower weekly compensation for part-time and seasonal workers, and for young people just starting off in work.
It also will see ACC earnings related compensation and rehabilitation treatment being cut off earlier for all workers.
ACC can now both disregard a person's pre-accident earnings and deem them fit enough to work a 30-hour week (it is currently set at 35 hours).
These changes will cause hardship. Most fulltime workers work at least 35 hours per week and need the income based on those hours to meet their living costs. The effect of this is made worse by the change that allows ACC to disregard what the injured person earned before their accident.
Until now, when assessing whether to deem someone work-ready, ACC "must" have regard to the injured person's pre-accident earnings. The new legislation changes this to "may". In effect, this will mean "may or may not".
This is again unfair. Someone on a middle or higher income could be injured at work but be deemed work-ready and pushed off ACC when they are able to work for just 30 hours in a much lower paid job.
The changes will shift costs to the State and taxpayers. Most former employees pushed off cover when they are "deemed" work ready in fact do not get back into fulltime work.
The majority already suffer a large drop in income. Many are simply shifted from weekly ACC earnings related compensation (at the cost of the employer account under ACC) to a Work and Income unemployment benefit (at the cost of the injured person and the taxpayer).
The main justification for changes to the scheme is said to be to save cost. However, how can this be justified when the cost of ACC for employers in New Zealand is already significantly lower per hundred dollars of wages and salaries than for Australian employers?
If the Government does follow through with its plans to privatise parts of ACC, (which the Government euphemistically calls "introducing competition"), then what is currently provided by the State via ACC will be provided by a profit-motivated private insurers.
David Parker is a Roxburgh-born Labour list MP.
Stuff |
Discuss this item on the forums. (0 posts) |
|
|
|
