Allowing people a voice

Sam speaks out publicly about the fact that ACC payments for counselling do not cover the full cost of each counselling session and victims of crime like Sam are left to scrape together the difference. What information should Nick Smith be able to release about Sam’s circumstances? Should that include that Sam, who was sexually abused by a female caregiver when he was a child, insists on seeing a male counsellor, and in his small town there is only one appropriately qualified male counsellor and his rates are higher than average?

Chris is on the sickness benefit and speaks out publicly about the fact MSD won’t help with the high transport costs of getting to specialist appointments. What information should Paula Bennett be able to release about Chris? Should that include the fact that since Chris’ last psychotic episode, in which she threatened to stab her nieces and nephew, she has moved out of her sister’s home near the specialist and back to her parents who live in a semi-rural area with no public transport?

Moana, who has a full time job, speaks to the select committee considering leave provisions about the hardship that compulsory christmas closedowns cause non-custodial parents and talks about her employer requiring a three week closedown. What information should Moana’s employer be able to release? Should that include the fact that Moana’s leave situation is atypical in that workplace and is due her taking extended leave earlier in the year to attend a residential alcohol programme and using annual leave to have supervised contact with her children whose father moved them out of town when her violence and drinking became dangerous?

Sam, Chris and Moana should feel safe speaking publicly about those issues of government policy. None are lying, none are misrepresenting their own situation, each is raising a genuine issue of policy. For each the disclosure of their personal circumstances could cause significant shame, damage to relationships and support networks, and provide a huge disincentive to speaking publicly.

Being a democracy is about more than giving everyone a vote, it’s about allowing everyone a voice.

[This post was originally a comment in reply to jcuknz in this thread.]

7 thoughts on “Allowing people a voice

  1. Allow me to anticipate the usual objecters: “Oh, but they’re not telling the whole story! We need all the facts to make an informed judgement! Sam needs to man up! Chris should stop expecting a free ride! Moana gave implied consent!”

    Because even humanizing the stories doesn’t make a difference to some people until the human is them.

  2. QoT I suggest you read my reply in the original thread. I like Kiwipolitico becuase normally people discus the matter in hand and do not engage in snide personalities as you find on Kiwiblog and your own blog. Have you banned me yet? I plan to write on my own blog about the places I’ve been banned from :-)

  3. QoT I suggest you read my reply in the original thread.

    I did. Unless there was invisible text I couldn’t see, it fully justified my comment, as you declared people who “live off the public purse” have no right to privacy about their income details, and accused the Johnston and Fuller of spreading “misinformation” and being “bludgers”.

  4. QoT — you mis-represent me. ‘Bludgers’ is your term not mine, unless you have edited my post to conform with your view, like you engage in the childish practice of deleting the vowels as part of your moderation facility.

  5. Can you two take your bickering to your own blogs? It’s really no fun to watch unless it’s happening in person. Cheers :)


  6. jcuknz/QoT,

    I have no real idea what you’re fighting about, any chance you could keep it away from here?

    Lew: snap! :)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *