• Full Story

Waitakere sick of 'beneficiary bashing'

Email
Print

Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:36p.m.

Carmel Sepuloni

Carmel Sepuloni

Voters were fed up with "beneficiary bashing" from National MP Paula Bennett when they decided not to return her to her Waitakere seat, Labour's Carmel Sepuloni says.

Ms Sepuloni was declared the winner in the seat on Saturday, when the final election results showed her beating Ms Bennett by just 11 votes.

National will seek a recount because of the close margin.

Ms Sepuloni told the Sunday Star Times Ms Bennett - who entered parliament after winning the seat in 2008 - has not been good for Waitakere.

"Despite the fact it is close, it just goes to show that there are 11 more people that think she wasn't [good]," Ms Sepuloni says.

Ms Bennett's hardline stance on welfare as minister of social development doesn't appeal to the high numbers of sole-parent households in the west Auckland electorate, she says.

"On the doorsteps, at the malls and supermarkets, when we talked to people [they said] they were struggling with the bare necessities ... whether it be putting food on the table or maintaining a roof over their head."

The loss was part of a double blow for National in the election results - with the special votes taking away another seat and giving it to the Greens.

That means the Greens will get a fourteenth MP in Mojo Mathers, who will be the country's first deaf MP.

However, National picked up another seat on Saturday, with Nicky Wagner taking Christchurch Central off Labour's Brendon Burns by 45 votes.

He's asked for a judicial recount.

The National-led government still has the numbers it needs to govern the 121-seat parliament, with 61 votes including two from ACT and United Future.

Prime Minister John Key is hopeful of adding the three Maori Party MPs to that line-up, with a deal expected to be signed on Sunday.

NZN

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

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


(Won't be published)



Comments

13 Dec 2011 08:57p.m.

aaron wrote:

Both are abit porky, weight watches anyone

12 Dec 2011 09:59p.m.

Boyd wrote:

Typical National response. Bash the beneficiaries but fail to mention that job opportunities are decreasing and the govt have failed to stem the tied. No one is taxpayer bashing, they just know it's either get on a benefit or starve.

12 Dec 2011 08:31a.m.

Alex wrote:

Under the last three years with National, the number of people on benefits increased. People realise that most people don't want to be on benefits but many do not have a choice. If there are fewer jobs then people won't be able to support themselves forever without help from the state. No wonder so many more people than ever are heading to Australia

12 Dec 2011 08:14a.m.

Mike wrote:

Typical Labour response! Win by 11 votes and suddenly the people have spoken!!! A hollow victory indeed. No one is "benefit bashing". I think we all just agree it is a system that needs to be looked at and the benefit paid to those who deserve and need it.

12 Dec 2011 07:47a.m.

John wrote:

Homer12 Dec 2011 6:30a.m.:- Spot the lab supporters who defend the taxpayer basher's. Typical Stereotype attitude, most people are actually sick of the taxpayer bashing, why? because most people don't want to be working, working, working (and now retiring later) just so feckless career beneficiaries can sit at home all day watching daytime television. By your own admission there ARE benefit dependent people ripping off the system. In other articles on this matter Sepuloni says the 11 votes show that 11 households don’t want Paula Bennett, so her focus is obviously on single parent families with young children living off the taxpayer. We live in an age when the technology exists such that NO-ONE need have a child if they are unable to feed it or provide a stable home environment. So what about the feckless girls who make a career out of spitting out babies just so that they can lounge around at home whilst hardworking taxpayers work extra hours to fund their lifestyle?

12 Dec 2011 06:30a.m.

Homer wrote:

Spot the nat supporters who defend the beneficiary basher's. Typical Stereotype attitude, most people are actually sick of the beneficiary bashing, why? because most people don't want to be on a benefit. The people that are benefit dependent or ripping off the system is a very small percentage. Here we are with a government that is obsessed with these changes over a very small percentage. This does nothing to address the fact that so many people want jobs but cannot get them.

11 Dec 2011 09:32p.m.

pondering wrote:

@ John & David: So how are these children meant to be supported after their dads refuse to provide and or have to be kept from harming them?? little men going after the most vulnerable in our community and condemning the mums who keep them safe.

11 Dec 2011 05:12p.m.

ben wrote:

well said i will never forgive english for stealing from the tax payer to pay for rent on a house he owned , how come its ok for people like mr english and the wealthy to rip of the state but wo betide the avrage joe if he is on the unemployment at a time when there is no jobs . ai can see a red landslide in 3 years time .

11 Dec 2011 01:27p.m.

John wrote:

What Sepuloni sees as "beneficiary bashing' I see as a minister rightly being careful with my hard-earned tax dollar. She is obviously in favour of a policy of "taxpayer bashing" to gaing the approval of the career beneficiaries to enable her to keep her seat and thus her snout in the trough. 11 votes is hardly an overwhelming victory.

11 Dec 2011 12:47p.m.

David wrote:

I think the rest of the country has spoken with regards to the fiscal and general irresponsibility of these people. Good job, National. The welfare reforms are very fair.