Archive for April, 2011

Policy Advice Review-Perpetuating the Myths

April 29th, 2011

Forgive me for this I told you so moment, but it infuriates me. To recap. Last year the government announced a review of policy advice. This was the one where Bill English claimed an alternative was to look on websites for policy, the “government by google” approach.

The announcement of the review came complete with the usual hyping up of Labour’s record on public services.

Between 2003 and 2009, total Government spending on policy advice across all ministries, departments and agencies is estimated to have jumped by more than 70 per cent from about $510 million to $880 million. “This is faster than the already rapid general increase in total Government spending during this period,” Finance Minister Bill English says. “The amount spent on policy advice is now nearly three quarters of the Government’s total annual police budget and it almost matches our annual spending on social housing.

At the time I raised concerns about the “estimate” of spending on policy advice being based, according to the Terms of Reference for the review, on

appropriation data from Budget data files gained by searching on the terms ‘policy’ and ‘policies’ in the title field

Terrific attention to detail there. And now that the report has been produced the Dominion Post reports

At the time the review was announced, the Government claimed policy spending had risen from $510 million in 2003 to $880m in 2009. However, the review – led by former Treasury secretary Graham Scott – found that most of the increase was spent on non-policy-related activities. Excluding the Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry, overall spending actually declined slightly in real terms over the period.

That’s right, with one exception, spending on policy advice went down in real terms. National has spent a lot of time going on about how Labour increased the back office at the expense of so-called frontline services. But their own report, by the former ACT candidate Graham Scott, finds this is not true.

Will we hear a retraction or apology from Bill English? No, he glosses over it as an estimate, despite making such a big deal of it at the time.

I welcome finding ways of improving policy advice to government, but it is not ok just to make things up that suit the myths you want to spread.

Don Brash and Peter Dunne- Lest We Forget

April 29th, 2011

Its been fascinating to hear Peter Dunne’s strident condemnation of a Don Brash led ACT Party in the last few days.

“Don Brash is a rigid right-wing ideologue – give him influence and a hand on power and watch the New Zealand we know become a harsher, more brutal place,” Mr Dunne said.

I could not agree more. But could this be the same Peter Dunne who in 2005 was part of a slightly odd photo opportunity (pictured above), that “cleared the way” for a coalition between Mr Dunne’s United Future Party and the Dr Brash led National Party. Surely not.

Alas yes. Peter Dunne really is the Groucho Marx of NZ Politics. ” Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them, well, I have others.”

PS If you want to see the coffee date in action, it is in part four of the Hollow Men documentary, which you can find here

Going to the extremes

April 26th, 2011

As the scrapping for the custody of the political corpse that is the ACT party continues, John Key has set himself some new standards around the degree of extremism he is relaxed about. Don Brash is ok, Roger Douglas is not. Funny thing though, I am not sure there is a cigarette paper between them actually.

Before we get to the policies I loved the list of movers and shakers on Stuff today as being backers of Brash. They say you can tell a lot about someone by the company they keep Alan Gibbs, Ruth Richardson et al. The only name not on that list who should be is Roger Douglas.

On policy, well it hardly needs to be said. Late last year Don Brash was hacking into the government on their lack of support for Roger Douglas bill to reinstate the youth minimum wage. As it happens Brash does not really believe in the minimum wage at all, so not sure much between them there. Same goes for low taxes, size of the state, public spending, privatisation, overseas investment you name it.

On race relations I think it would be fair to say Don has it all over Sir Roger in the champion of extremism competition. No party leader has been more divisive in terms of race relations in New Zealand’s recent history than Brash. But apparently on John Key’s criteria, that is all well and good. But then it would be wouldn’t it since John Key was right in there with Brash and the “Iwi/Kiwi” rhetoric as a member of Brash’s caucus.

Brash’s brand of extremism would be quite attractive to John Key’s political purposes I think, either through ACT or another vehicle, but not sure why its any different from Sir Roger’s, with the minor exception that it might just be a bit more popular.

The state of our services

April 25th, 2011

A curious little article has appeared today quoting State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie. Curious for a couple of reasons. First, the whole thing sounds like a political statement rather than that from a public servant. I certainly accept that public services will change the way they deliver services over the next few years, and we all welcome efficiencies in the public service. But his certainty about “the next five years” (why five years?) is also curious. The part of the statement about a reduction in the number of agencies is the direction of the current government, but it looks at public services the wrong way round from my point of view. We should be looking at the kind of services we want and need, and then considering how they are best delivered, not having a fixed view about the number of agencies going into that.

The article notes that SSC itself is safe “at this stage”. There are many wondering if it does have a future, with the future shape of the public sector being driven elsewhere. The overall strategic direction is coming from Treasury. The IT services are now with the Department of Internal Affairs, and procurement initiatives are being driven by MED. SSC is limited to the employment of Chief Executives as its main function.

I actually think this is a bad thing for public services. Treasury’s role is important in terms of fiscal discipline, but the agenda of quality public services needs someone to balance the power of Treasury. We have seen in past decades that an over powerful Treasury can wreck havoc if there is not some balance in the system. In its current state SSC does not look much like that organisation, but some competition of ideas in terms of the future development of public services is vital to their future health.

Take a Stand Against Bullying

April 14th, 2011

I can remember my experience of bullying. I have struggled with my weight since I was a kid. Being overweight is a really easy thing for bullies to pick on. Its visual, its obvious, and its something that the person is normally very sensitive about. At intermediate school I was taunted for a short period by a guy who’s name I hardly remember. I was scared, but I didn’t want to tell anyone. I don’t think I ever even told my parents. After a while I had had enough and I stood up to the guy concerned. He disappeared from my life, though I am pretty sure I would not have been the last person he picked on.

Bullying has been around forever, but that does not mean we should give up on stamping it out. There has been some sickening images of bullying on our televisions of late. And we need to work together to say that there is no room for bullies.

Today is Pink Shirt Day. This began in Canada in 2007 when two classmates saw someone being bullied and decided to do something about it. Its not just about wearing a pink shirt, there is now a whole campaign attached to stopping bullying. This year has received a boost with the involvement of New Zealand Olympian Blake Skjellerup. Have a watch of Blake’s video, and look at the website that is linked up above, and do your bit.




Authorised by Grant Robertson,
160 Willis St, Wellington.

Paid for by Labour Party members and supporters.