Every now and again, political parties bring acknowledged experts into their caucuses (almost always on the list) in an effort to bolster core competency and skills in a specialist area. Sometimes these individuals do well; sometimes they don’t. What history does show, however, is that no matter how smart or successful a person has been in a previous career, political experience and smarts cannot be fast-tracked.
There is no doubting Tim Groser’s experience as a trade diplomat. The fact that a few in NZ’s international trade circles don’t speak as highly of him as he does of himself may be professional jealousy – or simply the size of his formidable ego, but that is another story.
The question I ask re the success of the Groser experiment has nothing to do with his trade negotiation competencies, but rather concerns his skills as a political operator around the cabinet table.
John Key and Bill English speak constantly about growing NZ’s export markets, and we recently heard Mr Key say that we should be aiming to double our trade with China. Well, most parties (Greens exempted – they’ve voted against every FTA this term) agree with increasing the level, volume, consistently, sustainability and quality of our exports, but how is the country’s business community supposed to take advantage of the potential opportunities that FTAs present when the Nats have just cut millions from successful trade development schemes? When I asked Groser about this in parliament he gave the typically smart-arse answer that he expected his staff to do more with less. Okay…
The bottom line is that the national rhetoric simply does not match the trade funding.
The advantage to the country in having someone like Phil Goff as Trade Minister is that not only was he excellent around the international negotiation table, but also just as competent a negotiator around the cabinet table. Someone as seasoned and smart as Phil knew exactly how to negotiate the minefield that is the budget process and who to talk to and deal with when securing funding for his portfolio. It is these skills – as well as portfolio competencies – that make a very successful Minister.
This is why I ask the question if the Groser experiment has been successful. There is no point negotiating FTA’s if NZ companies haven’t the competencies and / or backup and / or support to internationalise their products and services. The cuts to trade development funding during Groser’s time as Trade Minister cannot be ignored.
Do more with less Mr Groser.? Hmmm. Somehow I don’t think this is the right answer. Surely NZ companies with export potential deserve better. What it does prove, is just how effective Phil Goff was as a champion for NZ trade. And what a great PM he will make.!!
Its GROSER not Grosser
Trying to be too subtle can make one look like a little simple at times. Sorry. S
One of my customers asked MFAT for information, possible contact details etc for compaines in French Polynesia they were interested in securing Exports to.
3 Weeks later they had heard nothinmg, so chased them up, to be told that they (MFAT) were a bit busy at present, sorry but really can’t help.
Within 2 hours of hearing this from my customer we had provided over 35 relevant companies details to them.
We are International freight Forwarders…And as Exports are the life blood of NZ, where was MFAT ???
Thanks Peter. Another story along similar lines: a very good friend of mine with a software development company in Akld made an appointment with NZTE in London last year. Turned up at the agreed time only to be told that his appointment had been cancelled and to go down to the British equivalent. He did, and was told the reason why the NZTE staff had cancelled his meeting (without informing him) was because it was their staff christmas function that evening and they were busy organising that. What sort of message does this send to NZ exporters.?!? I mentioned this in parliament when Groser was there and expected him (or one of his officials) to get back to me to investiagate, but none did. Hope this experience is a one-off, because the Brits were amused at the complete lack of professionalism of the NZ reps.
peter I suspect they were too busy running minor errands for the Minister. And maybe some MFAT staff should do some secondments within the Singapore Govt and learn how you can really help local industry.
Agreed, Stuart, G
F F is cool 
He kicked butt on the world stage. 
I’m sure even Grosser would drink to that
Or anything for that matter 
Agree Loota, what growth rate is Singapore forecasting , 15% I understand.. Makes a mockery of our efforts !
Imagine how Groser is going to double our trade with China, by his staff doing less with less.
But Keys Ministry of Tourism got a $30 mill budget boost ( plus the department got abolished ), no doubt some will go on visitor centres around the new open cast mines !
It is sad that the most sucessful people can be absolute deleted. personal. Clare
I think someone needs to give you a prize for line of the day, Stuart!
“The fact that a few in NZ’s international trade circles don’t speak as highly of him as he does of himself may be professional jealousy – or simply the size of his formidable ego”
Pure Gold!
I think Goff did a brilliant job on the world stage (I have other opinions about Winston however.) In terms of sucesses I rank Goff ahead of Groser on the world stage, despite liking Groser’s/National’s/Key’s policies better than Goff’s/Labour’s/Clark’s.
Fair cop Clare!
Kiwiteen you haven’t been commenting for a while. Fine that you are, but watch out. I’m not as tolerant as I was. We don’t accept personal abuse. Clare
And I’m even less tolerant and have deleted most of your comment – do not use that sort of language again Trevor
Yes Clare!
I forgot how strict you were but it is only right that you are this strict.
Feel free to censure me when I “personally abuse” though I shall try not to!
Spud next time you do chat room stuff you will get a short break Trevor
Trevor,
I have no wish to thread-jack (so feel free to email me about this) but In that comment I did not personally abuse anyone it was a generic comment about the attributes certain people have when they get power. Was it the adjective I used?
Feel free to delete this comment and post your reply over the top.
Noun, used twice. Not acceptable on this site. Trevor
Thanks for the clarification and email. Will adjust my behaviour accordingly.
No chatroom stuff, Trevor…
I think that the American model, of pulling experts in from the top of their respective fields is fantastic. With the NZ system, your expertise is limited to whoever’s on your list, which means they need to be at least part time politician, and probably not specialising in their particular field as much as they could be.
Not that MPs aren’t competent, but it’d be great if we could bring in the top brains from elsewhere in the private/public sector to perform Ministerial roles.
pseudo, its a case where MPs as they become more senior need to become like private sector CEOs in terms of breadth. So they need to be broad, but also fairly deep generalists. A corporate CEO may have a background in engineering or finance or marketing, but chances are they are not going to be professionally trained and an expert in all 3.
So in order to succeed they need to know how to use specialist expertise – how to ask the right questions of the specialists, how to challenge them, how to spot a good idea, how to spot a dead end.
You can leave these roles to pure specialists – but the downside is that they will often not be able to properly add concerns from outside their field into their equations.
I understand Loota, thanks for the succinct explanation though!
The MP you’re describing seems almost superhuman, and indeed I think those who have truly shone in our political arena have been close to that (Clark, Fitzsimons to name just two from my fairly limited memory). Problem with superhumans is that stock is fairly limited.
I agree with your point about asking the right questions, maybe some kind of job sharing arrangement would work, (specialised brains coupled with more generalised wisdom), but that seems a bit bloated…
I don’t have the answer, and I’m not sure if any system out there does. Just my two cents.
Back to the original topic, I actually think that we don’t have enough MPs, that they’re underpaid, and that we should be spending more on the public sector, not cutting back. So no, bad more-with-less Groser.