When I was working at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade I found myself as the campaign manager for the local body election campaign of my friend who was the Labour candidate. It was one of those things. You go to a meeting (always a big mistake) and walk out with a job to do. I recognised it was something that might see my name out and about, so I went to see my boss. He was a staunch National supporter, I think a member. He listened to my case, and said that it was fine, and despite our differences he said would always defend my right to participate in the political process.
Public servants are ever conscious of their role to serve the government of the day, and of the restrictions placed on them by the Code of Conduct. That is what makes the Department of Labour decision to effectively tell its staff that they could not participate in the rally at Parliament today on Pay Equity very disturbing. There may well be questions about the involvement of some senior staff or perhaps those directly connected with the work, but the wider staff of the Department of Labour should in my opinion have had the right to go to the rally if they chose to.
In recent election campaigns I have noticed that public servants seemed to be getting inconsistent and inaccurate advice about how involved they can be in campaigns, including whether they could have hoardings on fences, deliver pamphlets or even be seen with a candidate.
I believe that the rights of public servants to participate in the political process as private citizens need to be protected, and if necessary clarified. Of course their should be guidance as to how to ensure they can continue to serve the government of the day and avoid compromising their ability to provide quality advice and support, but the interpretation of that guidance should respect the professionalism of public servants and give them their hard won democratic rights.
Posted in Pay Equity, Public Servants and Public Service. |
It would be fair to say that when the current Speaker was the Minister of Education in the 1990s, we had a somewhat fractous relationship. He refused to come to Dunedin where at the time I was the Student Association President. So we drove to Christchurch to find him. This carried on for a year or so, and culminated with Lockwood climbing out a window at Canterbury University. Ah, those were the days.
But through it all, one thing I could say for Lockwood was that he took seriously his commitment to ‘life-long learning’. I disagreed with many of the policy ideas, but the concept that we should never stop learning, up-skilling, training and developing is one where I was in total agreement. It is only with this kind of view of education that society will continue to develop and productivity improve.
Sadly, the recent actions of the National Government, and Minister Tolley make it clear that there is very little commitment to the concept of lifelong learning at the moment. The roll call is sad:
- a lack of real initatives on training as part of the Jobs Summit or the nine day fortnight;
- no plan to implement the Skills Strategy;
- cutting back the Training Incentive Allowance;
- cuts to Adult and Community Education in schools that puts at risk the further education of thousands of people;
- and now today we see Anne Tolley is reviewing the ability of seniors to access student loans.
This is short-sighted nonsense from National. Lockwood Smith understood that lifelong learning was part of a cohesive, productive society. Just like not properly funding super, we might not see all the effects of this immediately, but over time we will all pay for not making these investments.
Posted in Lockwood Smith, Tolley and Education. |
I spent a bit of question time today trying to get Nick Smith to say sorry to the staff at ACC. This might seem like a minor thing, but bear with me here. The story is this. In the financial review debate in Parliament on Tuesday last week Nick Smith blurted out that ACC was going to announce redundancies in the corporate office. The problem was staff had not been told. The Chief Executive was forced to issue an apology to staff that they had found out this way, and that her plan had been for people to be treated with respect and dignity.
Nick Smith’s response has been to say he has nothing to apologise for. He had thought it was being announced Tuesday, when it was Wednesday. I find this a breathtaking display of disrespect and arrogance. His lack of empathy for the workers involved speaks volumes to me.
I get a lot of tips and information about likely job cuts in the public sector but I always try to ensure that any public comment comes only after the affected have been informed. It is common courtesy. Just as is apologising when your mistake causes concern and insecurity for hard-working people. Nick Smith’s pre-emptive announcement did just that. Staff at ACC now know how little their Minister thinks of them. He could make up a little for that with an apology. It really is an easy word to say.
Posted in ACC, Nick Smith and National. |
