Beneficiary admits fabricating Bennett meeting details

Email
Print

Beneficiary admits fabricating Bennett meeting details

3News NZ

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett (L) and beneficiary Natasha Fuller

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett (L) and beneficiary Natasha Fuller

By Rebecca Wright

More light has been shed on the meeting between Social Development Minister Paula Bennett and the solo parent who has taken a privacy complaint against her.

Tonight 3 News can reveal some of the emails our first story was based on, which indicated that monetary compensation was under discussion.

Now the solo parent who wrote them says money wasn't talked about, and admits she made those details up.

Ms Bennett and her press secretary met with Natasha Fuller and Ms Fuller's grandmother in Cambridge on Wednesday.

The meeting was arranged by the Privacy Commissioner and tonight 3 News can reveal the Facebook messages Ms Fuller sent to a friend about the meeting.

Before it, Ms Fuller’s emails show she was talking about money:

“Don’t no about millions but few thousands:-)... She needs me to drop my case and tell everyone how lovely she is ha ha.

“I don’t want to drop [my case] but they cut my payments right back...So be hard not to take a payout at this point as I also don't like media they mean.”

The Minister has forcefully denied that any financial settlement was ever discussed before or at the meeting with fuller.

After the meeting Ms Fuller claimed:

“Things went really well she wasn't that scary... I dropped the tears a few times and she felt sorry for me - wont put me back in the media and get me hurt again and willing to talk settlement.

“I’ve got a tough choice to make have two days to come up with what I want as a payment I don’t want to sound greedy but its hard to put price on what iv been through.”

3 News spoke to Ms Fuller today and asked her to explain the contents of the emails. 

She said she was “lying and joking” and that even thought the discussions were quite detailed - this was just “part of her personality”.

The Privacy Commission said today:

  • It commonly arranges these face-to-face meetings
  • Settlements include an apology, an assurance an action will not recur, modest compensation or personal gestures, such as flowers or vouchers
  • Settlements are kept confidential

The matter is close to resolution, but what the Privacy Commissioner has found may never become public. 

Ms Fuller told 3 News that Ms Bennett had apologised to her for breaching her privacy last year, but Ms Fuller made a point of saying that she hadn't asked for monetary compensation.

Ms Bennett says that a payout isn't going to happen.

Labour says Ms Bennett shouldn't be allowed to get away with resolving the issue behind the scenes and will pursue the issue in Parliament next week.

3 News

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

17/05/2010 3:02:45 p.m.

fay manson wrote:

if you look after people in care people would look up to you but you don't know how to look after anyone in care they why we take you to court because we want justices and you to say you did worng by us but that to hard for you to say

9/05/2010 3:32:40 p.m.

LULU wrote:

That does suck steve, being made redundant is like being dealt a bad hand. My hat goes off you for paying a mortgage on minimum wage. I guess the gap between high and low income is widening, check out the stats. There needs to be something done about it. Does seem a little high for a benefit, but guess we can't judge others without knowing the full story. I think Fuller was handpicked out of the bunch cause she received the most.

9/05/2010 3:14:41 p.m.

Ratbite wrote:

Benefit payments are made available for all to see, just go on the Winz website, the individual payments are not publically available. There are good reasons some people are on the benefit, such as old age or illness. Some young people can't work or they are required to have experience.

8/05/2010 2:07:48 p.m.

Steve wrote:

Glitch, can you read? If you read my post, it tells you I am getting minimum wage.

Lulu, why should someone get a top up for having kids? I certainly do not get an accomodation allowance - sorry, I am scrimping to pay my house off, not renting.

5/05/2010 9:05:45 p.m.

Fannot wrote:

Will the real Peter Saunders please stand please stand up, Has she worked out which one he is yet? Is There something seriously wrong with Bennet?. Cuting the TIA which she was on, that helped her into the job in the first place. Comment she once made in the herald "you won't see me bagging solo mums" think she should eat those words. I haven't heard so much solo mum slag off in my life, that's seriously wrong!!!

3/05/2010 1:25:57 p.m.

Who can say wrote:

Lightseed. Im sorry was supposed to have out four instead of two. Calling someone is an "idiot is a bit harsh don't you think?

3/05/2010 9:40:06 a.m.

Lightseed wrote:

it sad when people comment without even bothering to understand the story. The privacy commission arranged the meeting, it was also arranged that each party would have someone with them for support/witness, which is what the press secretary was there for. It is only natural that since she is the one who passed the details on to the media she be the one there as well. Perhaps some of you idiots can actually learn to educate yourself on the story.

2/05/2010 6:44:00 p.m.

LULU wrote:

Steve this figure was given without facts, and was misleading she had a TIA, Special needs top up of some such, accommodation supplement, and some childcare subsidy on top of her benefit. Not sure how many kids she got. I wouldn't say looking after kids by yourself should be really called "doing jack", Your expenses pretty much double when you have one child.

2/05/2010 3:32:20 p.m.

Glitch wrote:

LOL Steve what are you getting paid a week skank bag?.

Oh dont tell me, you dont want to share.. privavcy and all that.

What perks does paula get in total... oh dont tell me, while her salary may be paublice her total perks are most certainly not.

Its a case of hypcrite chasing idiot, chasing make believe fairy.

You think it was good that someone's privacy was breached... you wouldnt have thought so if it were you own.

Paula Bennett is a woman full of hatred... not for food however as she overindulges in that, then oges on TV3 and says she is proud of being a overeater.

Good damned role model for kids isnt she.

Why take your press secretary with you unless you were deliberately want to spin something?.

Pay Fuller to lie, so that next term in parliament you can get all the dole bludgers out and axe the welfare system completely.

Wonder how much it cost them to spin the story this way.

Paula is about as corrupt as they come, she is also very much a self hater.

2/05/2010 8:42:52 a.m.

Who can say? wrote:

Who can say what really happened aye? Maybe fuller got payed off only if she said she didn't receive any, after all everything has to be remained hush hush right? I f you were in Bennett situation, you wouldn't risk your job security and would try anything to keep a lid on the whole thing. Only 2 people know what really went on, we can just speculate. TV3 was on to a good story, but something went terribly wrong.