Posts by nzlemming
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: The miserable archive, in reply to BenWilson,
Key was a surfer on the human wave. He rode it, but he did not cause the wave.
The wave is neo-liberalism. We've reached the point where it crashes on the rocks destroying those who cling there.
-
Are there any cases where testing for meth was negative?
-
-
Hard News: We are, at last, navigating…, in reply to Joe Wylie,
they provide Reepicheep - and you too, it would seem - with hours of online fun.
Thank the gods I had swallowed my mouthful of coffee before I clicked the link or my screen would have worn it. I've never heard him called that before, but it's so fitting.
-
Up Front: A Word About Safety, in reply to Moz,
Somehow I have trouble imagining the legal system saying "oh yes, any reasonable person would expect him to be happy with that".
Sadly, you would be immensely surprised and saddened by what the legal system might expect.
-
Hard News: We are, at last, navigating…, in reply to izogi,
At the risk of sounding stupid because I haven't thought this through, maybe there's merit in some kind of independent parliamentary commissioner role who's legislatively charged with investigating, reporting on and potentially enforcing the independence of the public service? (Maybe comparable with other independent roles like the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.)
That's what the SSC is supposed to do, but previous Commissioners have bottled on finding ways to enforce it. When I was doing e-government there in the early oughties, we litterally had no way to get an agency to use the standards we were devising, if they could persuade their minister that they were a legitimate exception. And they always could because their minister didn't know shit about how the agency did what it did. What he or she did know is how to pressure our minister to have the agency excluded from the schedule.
There's a constitutional point as well. Parliament is sovereign, but the public service is part of the executive and reports to the government of the day. Sitting a Parliamentary Commissioner on top of the State Services Commissioner might be seen to be a step too far in having Parliament interfere in the delivery of government activities.
-
Hard News: We are, at last, navigating…, in reply to izogi,
Probably, but I wonder if there's a better way to reinforce the separation of Ministers from the public service, before it comes to resigning, than just tell Ministers they have to resign all the time.
We used to have this until Lange's government passed the State Sector Act 1987, which set the departments and ministries up as separate little businesses focused entirely on their minister and not on being part of a wider government process. An awful lot of the current problems with public service and accountability can be traced back to that split. SSC employs the CEOs but doesn't have any teeth to enforce any behaviours, or the nous or gumption to sort out what behaviours are appropriate. Which leaves most of the actual public servants between a rock and a hard place. Saying no to a minister is verboten (I did once to one of mine, which he was okay with but his staff advised my manager I was not to be brought into contact with the minister again) and saying no to your boss is also frowned upon.
Hint to OIA requesters: be sure to specify "any diary notes" regarding the subject (or, even better, by a particular individual if you know who) when making your requests. Agencies have been known to interpret "communications" as not including diary notes (in today's jargon, "contemporaneous memoranda"). If a bureaucrat knows that her agency is going to do something that will backfire and can't get anyone to stop it, she will often write a diary note "for the file" and insert it quietly herself as an arse-covering manoeuvre, especially if she is in the firing line when it all falls apart. In the meantime, she will be diligently looking for a new position...
-
Hard News: We are, at last, navigating…, in reply to Russell Brown,
But in general the reality is likely much more mundane than politicians taking kickbacks. There is, as already noted in this thread, a general risk-averseness in the public sector – and appearing to stand up for druggies is generally fairly risky when your political masters are busy stigmatising them.
*coff* Mike Sabin *coff*
Edit: I see Worik has already mentioned him.
-
Oh, that sucks so bad. I hate self-appointed experts with a passion.
-
Someone asked me if I was planning to put myself forward for one of the digital advisor panels and I said "Not if Clare Curran is minister". I try not to criticise her too much (ex sister-in-law) but I am not expecting anything startling in the broadcasting or ICT sectors while she is in place. Bags of enthusiasm but no real nous in this area. Trouble is that Labour hasn't got anyone better for ICT. Gareth Hughes would have been a good choice, IMHO.