Dr. Frank Shizenhausen returns with a hard-hitting attack on the ne'er-do-wells who suck the taxpayer dry.
I was delighted to hear the Prime Minister's response to questions by Labour in Parliament about the increasing burden on food banks.
Mr Key told the House that "anyone on a benefit actually has a lifestyle choice. If one budgets properly, one can pay one's bills."
He went on to say that the reason why some people had no money left for essentials was because of the poor choices they made.
When Mr Key speaks on the subject of food banks he speaks with authority. Key's expertise in this area is inarguable. The man's worth $50 million, so if there's one thing he knows something about it's banks. Even if the bank he goes to is filled with money instead of food - his money, loads of it.
If our Prime Minister is so loaded he can afford to sprinkle ground-up hundred dollar bills on his breakfast cereal, and to have his briefing papers printed on gold leaf, then it's no more than he deserves. Mr Key made his money the hard way, through old-fashioned toil and honest endeavour: shifting money from point A to point B and then shifting it back again. Like a farmer carefully nurturing his stock he watched his money pile turn into a mountain.
If you look at what a beneficiary earns it's clear that they can easily afford to live a comfortable lifestyle without the need to queue outside their local food bank. There are plenty of options available for those who struggle. Any prudent person put in a difficult financial position would turn to crime and prostitution to supplement their income. I will always be prepared to help a vulnerable young woman who is prepared to help herself in this way.
But most of these slackers would just prefer to mope around at home doing nothing.
The fact of the matter is that with a bit of sensible budgeting, and by eating grass instead of bread or meat, anyone on a benefit can easily get by.
But the do-gooders and welfare apologists keep saying "but what about those unexpected costs? Doctors, dentists and car breakdowns?"
Even a fool can see how entirely unnecessary and avoidable such expenses are. Take dentists' fees as an example. Beneficiaries complain because they don't have enough to eat, and then they complain because their teeth are rotten. But tell me this: if they have nothing to eat then why the hell do they even need teeth? You see how illogical their arguments are?
And why do they need to repair their car? Don't they have feet? They didn't have cars in the 18th century, and people lived very well back then, if they survived infancy and the constant warfare.
Medical bills can also be easily avoided. If you have no money then you can't afford to get sick. So don't. It's simple. Just as people on welfare should not live beyond their means, they should not be careless with the number of illnesses they have.
But the poor are so often extravagant with their illnesses. They live in their damp houses, spending their lives in bed coughing away while racked with debilitating depression and pain. Luxury! If only I could spend my days lying down and doing nothing. Yet they still moan. If they want a bit of sympathy from the rest of us then let them try budgeting their sicknesses a bit more sensibly.
The truth is these people deserve what they get. They get laid off and then bleat because they paid taxes all their life and now discover they get next to no support from the government. More fool them. No sensible person pays taxes nowadays. If you haven't wrapped up your financial affairs in a maze of LAQCs and trusts, and if everything you do, breathe and crap is not tax deductible, you really are bringing it upon yourself. Next we'll be told these people don't employ legions of tax lawyers and accountants to manage their affairs.
Some people just won't help themselves.