One of my jobs as a political advisor in the PMs office was to have oversight of processing Official Information Act requests. We did look closely at the information that was being released, and from time to time we did withhold material. We did this on the basis of the criteria in the Act. If there was advice from officials that was free and frank and its release would stop them from doing it again, that is a reason. If there was information that might prejudice a commercial negotiation or was part of a confidential discussion then that was a reason.

Being worried how a paper will be interpreted is not a criteria under the Act. Steven Joyce is the maestro of the government’s strategy and spin we are told. Well that is well and good, but as a Minister he has to follow the rules of the Official Information Act. He needs to be held to account for this decision.

The Wellington City Council has sent out a note to ratepayers suggesting that one way they can avoid the GST increase is to make their next three rate payments before the 1st of October. A nice idea, but many Wellington ratepayers are struggling to make one payment at the moment, let alone, as Marcus says three payments in the next seven

This sounds oddly reminiscient of what the Labour Party has been telling Bill English and John Key for some time, that there is no plan. Conor English notes the seismic changes in the world economy and raises the resulting need for us to innovate and to grow our capital markets. He says

We need to focus on the strategic issues that matter. Are we asleep at the wheel, like Wellington was when it forgot to extend its runway for long haul planes? Will we only wake up to realise the world has passed us by and a real opportunity lost? Lets not sleep. Lets find a solution so future generations can benefit from our Kiwi ingenuity.

An interesting article, raising interesting issues. Could also be interesting to be a fly on the wall at the next English family get-together.

This is the day that reflects on the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. The scale of both the short term and long devastation in these two cities was horrific. 92% of the buildings in the city were destroyed, between 140,000 and 160,000 people died. The health effects of radiation were felt immediately, killed many over the following months, and the legacy of illness and disability has stayed with descendants over generations.

Hiroshima Day has become not only a day to reflect on the horror of the bombing, but also to mobilise support for ridding the world of nuclear weapons. In my speech today I talked about the hope that many people have for progress towards that goal. In New Zealand we now have cross party support for abolition. Phil Twyford sponsored a resolution in Parliament this year that had support from all parties. Both Ban Ki Moon and Barack Obama have committed themselves to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. But of course hope is not enough. There are still 28,000 nuclear weapons in the world, and an enormous job to be done to move the major nuclear powers.

NGOs and governments are working together on this. As I looked at the likes of Dame Laurie Salas, Gerald O’Brien and Alyn Ware and some of the younger folk present today, I know that this is a campaign with a huge history and a desire to carry on.

there was no more room to cut the district health board’s costs, despite Government pressure to do so. “I cannot see where any more major efficiency can come from without negatively impacting on services.”

Even Sir John Anderson, the government’s appointment to Chair the Board has said that any further savings “would cut into muscle”.

I have had a bit to do with Ken over the last 18 months or so that I have been an MP, and I regard him very highly. He listened, he was honest, and had a very good grasp on what was happening within the DHB. When he sounds the warning he has made on his departure, the government should listen. The two areas where I have the biggest concerns in Wellington are mental health and public health where cuts are starting to have an impact. In Mental Health this will get worse with the closing of the two community clinics in the city and Kilbirnie set to cause significant disruption to service, despite the best efforts of the staff involved.

When we combine what is happening in Wellington, the public uprising over neurosurgery in Dunedin, the at least 80 cuts to frontline services elsewhere across the country, as highlighted by my colleague Ruth Dyson, and the fact we still do not have a Director-General of Health in place, questions have got to be asked about where Tony Ryall is taking Health. It is never going to be easy. Maintaining and developing health services with an ageing population, increased costs and understandable public desire for locally accessible services is a tough ask. But it needs leadership and it needs to get beyond glib answers in Parliament.

A place to start? Of Capital and Coast’s $47 million deficit, $37 million of it relates to the building of the regional hospital. A senior health professional I spoke to on Friday noted that other DHBs with financial issues are also in this state because of costs related to the buildings. A chunk of this is due to the capital charging regime. I think we need to re-look at the capital charging regime. Of course we want DHBs and other government entities to be efficient in their use of buildings and capital, but if it starts to mean cuts into core medical services, we have to question if the priorities are right?

A little bit of light relief for the end of the session. I asked the Minister of Finance ” Does he stand by his statement, ” if you know which websites to go to you can get access to high quality advice?”.

This came from Bill English on Radio NZ in the wake of the announcement of the review of policy advice that had come up with a figure for the cost of advice by entering “policy” and “policies” in a search of the title field of Budget documents.

It was a pity that Gerry Brownlee was not chosen to answer. It would have been more fun with him, but still nice to have a bit of a laugh at the end of the session.

It was not a great surprise that National and ACT opposed the bill, but disappointing all the same. The Bill sought to have clear and consistent criteria for ethical investment in the legislation that govern our major investment funds such as the Super Fund and ACC. The criteria are based on international norms and treaties and emphasise the importance of investing in organisations that have good governance, treat their stakeholders fairly and uphold human rights and good labour standards. From an environmental standpoint the organisations that are invested in should be conscious of their ecological footprint and should not be harmful to resources such as air, water and land.

The opposition was based on the fact that some good progress has been made in ethical investment policies and that “the market” would deal with the issues. I thought this was an opportunity to move from a passive approach to ethical and sustainable investment to a positive one that could re-inforce our image as an environmentally and socially conscious country on the world stage.

Anyway it was an interesting process to go through, and I am the wiser for it. Pleased to extend the support for the Bill across the House, and have agreed with other parties to keep working on the issue.

Its perhaps no surprise then that Graham Scott, former ACT Party candidate has been chosen to head the review. Mr Scott has had a bit to say over the years about the state sector, including noting in a paper in 2009 that one of Labour’s failings was we had too many political appointments to advisory bodies! I guess he is feeling differently nowadays, especially as on the 30th of August he will be the guest of honour at what appears to be an ACT fundraiser in Auckland

In all seriousness listening to Bill English today, and knowing Graham Scott’s ideological views, this review does have the potential to be one that pushes the privatisation of advice in the public sector. While from time to time all governments will want to get advice from outside the public service, the value of a neutral public service able to give free and frank advice can not be understated. It is a cornerstone of the Westminster system, and gives taxpayers the re-assurance that someone is undertaking dispassionate and thorough analysis and review of policy. Simply getting advice from those you agree with via the internet as Mr English said on radio tonight will not be good for the quality of public services in New Zealand.

PS. take a look at the question (from about 3.30) on this today. I had a bit of fun with the idea of using figures obtained by the equivalent of a google search!

Richard O’Brien, creator of the cult classic the Rocky Horror Show appears to have being granted residency in New Zealand, so Sue Moroney and I took a few minutes out in Hamilton today to celebrate with his alter-ego, Riff-Raff who has been immortalised by the city.

He has been granted an exception to policy, and while some people might have concerns, on the face of it seems reasonable. O’Brien lived in New Zealand for about 12 years during his adolesence and early twenties. He returned to NZ often as his parents remained here until they passed away a few years ago. His siblings still live here, and he owns property.

The Rocky Horror Show was a huge part of my growing up. Along with a group of friends we were kind of obsessed with the show, and to this day I can just about remember almost all the words (sad I know). We saw sit live a couple of times in the 80s with Rob Muldoon and Billy T James fulfilling the roles of the Narrator. I also remember a particularly boisterous screening of the film one Friday evening, that culminated in a mass confetti and water fight both inside and outside the theatre.

It is a total classic, and fantastic that it was written by a New Zealander. Richard O’Brien once said it was based on his experiences in Hamilton and Tauranga in the 1960s. Who knew they were that interesting….