Ruth Dyson triple whammy denied

Ruth Dyson had favoured a Threes Company approach to families of
the future but now denies giving support for such a menage a trois.





Fairfax has finally got hold of this story, a week later, but never mind.

It is the story of Ruthy Dyson and her penchant for supporting diversity, with taxpayer money, in the bedroom.

I got it wrong on Monday that Dyson gave a speech in Parliament in which she mentioned her now infamous "triples" remark. The speech was apparently delivered by Dyson at Victoria University on May 6 and Gerry Brownlee asked a question in Parliament about it.

She was referring to de factos, civil union couples and "triples", etc, etc and her governments future support for them.

Now she denies having said it or in fact that it was written for her:


"I get speeches a lot that I don't give. I don't want to be too critical of people who draft my speeches, but I get a lot of speeches, in draft, that I never use. They have no relationship with what I say."

She "didn't have a clue" what the speech notes meant nor what they were referring to.
"I haven't bothered asking because I'm not interested in it "


Below is the question(in full context) referring to a speech Dyson apparently made at Victoria University in May. Gerry Brownlee in Parliament from Hansard. It was moved from its original URL:


9. Social Trends—Recent Advice

[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.]

9. RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Has she received any recent advice on New Zealand’s social trends?

Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) : Yes, I have. I have been advised that the gap between rich and poor households has closed for the first time in 20 years. The proportion of people with low incomes is also considerably lower. The earnings per person was higher in real terms in 2007 than it was in the mid-1990s, and overall poverty fell from 19 percent in 2001 to 13 percent in 2007, using the Social Report measure, representing a total of 190,000 fewer New Zealanders in poverty in the last year.

Russell Fairbrother: Has she has received any advice that explains why the gap between lower household incomes and higher household incomes has closed?

Hon RUTH DYSON: Yes, I have. The fact that incomes for lower and middle income households has grown more rapidly than others is attributed mainly to the Working for Families package. This is, of course, why National’s Bill English says their message to the public before the election is to keep Working for Families intact, because they do not want to be seen as taking money off people. However, after the election, if National is the Government, it will give it “a bit of a sort out”.

Gerry Brownlee: Does she recall giving a recent speech in which she said: “We must cater for the diversity we know exists. By this I mean the range of relationships, from single, couples, triples, blended de facto, and so on. That’s where we are going with social policy.”, and in the recent advice she received on social trends in New Zealand, was there a description of the relationship she describes as a triple; if so, what was that advice?

Hon RUTH DYSON: No.

The speech was clearly written for her because she doesn't deny a speech existed and she cant anyway because it was posted on the Parliament website, then removed.

It seems someone may have got to the Labour loving website scoop.co.nz as well. A Monday press release from the "Family Party" about this has been removed as well, from a Google search:


Scoop: Labour gearing for more social engineering
11 Aug 2008 ... In a May speech to Victoria University social policy students, Dyson ... Here Ruth Dyson signals Labour’s intention to broaden that scope ...www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0808/S00171.htm - 58k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this


Just click on "Cached" to get the story though.

Ruth Dyson's comments regarding her denial of having made her "triples" speech seems to fly in the face of evidence to the contrary. The speech was definitely written so why would Dyson deny it was hers?

Another secret labour agenda?

I say a resounding yes!

Related Political Animal reading

Bigamy on Labour's secret agenda?
Not that there is anything wrong with it

c Political Animal 2008

Bigamy on Labour's secret agenda?

I was looking for a written quote from a bizarre speech that Ruth Dyson made in Parliament last week on the Parliamentary website but couldn't find it but someone from KiwiBlog has posted it on their site. It has been removed from the record of Parliament website for some reason, which is curious because it is supposed to be a complete record of Parliament and its speeches.

“Shifting the focus from social welfare to social development is about considering the wellbeing of the whole population, and communities within that population, rather than solely focusing on the traditional family group. We must cater for the diversity, we know exists. By this I mean the range of relationships from single, couples, triples, blended, de facto, and so on. That’s where we’re going with social policy.”

Ruth Dyson 2008

I covered this area of Labours social policy on Friday, in relation to Helen Clark's enthusiasm for minorities rather than the majority of middle class families that pay the bulk of the country's taxes.

Dyson though, was talking about a "shift" that she wanted to make in social policy, even further away from the nuclear family to focus on a more "inclusive" one that recognised all the above. The most curious of all being the "triples" inclusion.

That word got an immediate response from the majority of those that were in parliament the day of Dyson's speech, a collective "huh?" was heard across the benches.

Now in the light of the Labour Party lurching further and further towards the extreme in terms of social policy, to envelope the bizarre and fringe areas of life and normalise them, Dyson really needs to explain what she means by "triples".

In the absence of an explanation, we can only speculate what Ruth Dyson meant by the term "triples". The first logical conclusion would be that Dyson is referring to bigamy, practiced in New Zealand illegally at present by a part of the Muslim population.

Is Labour looking at legalising bigamy?

What other possible permutations could there be?

3 homosexual males
3 homosexual females
3 male friends
3 female friends
2 homosexual females and a sperm donor
2 homosexual males and an egg donor
2 homosexual males and a German Sheppard

Yada, yada, yada.

There are loads of other possibilities. The New Zealand public just don't know what Ruth Dyson is talking about and she needs to explain her bizarre speech in Parliament. Public money will be spent on investigating such possibilities should Labour be re elected this year and welfare money will once again be used to support the fringe dwellers in our country, at the expense once again of the majority of Kiwis who will pay for it.

Is it yet another secret agenda of Labours, let out in Parliament last week by accident? It certainly gives a lie to the fake family of a mother, father and young child pictured in Labour Party election propaganda outed by media at the beginning of June.

To normalise bigamy?

Surely not.

Related Political Animal reading

Not that there is anything wrong with it

Fully aware of Muslims: Jihad and understanding

Having a multiple Muslim

New grab by at taxpayer funds by Labour comes with fakes included

c Political Animal 2008