The list of directors and chairs for Auckland Super City’s council-controlled organisations agreed by Cabinet last week under-represents the Asian and Ethnic voice.
It is a big disappointment the Government has not acknowledged more fully Asian and Ethnic representation in its Super City reform.
There are many successful Asian business people to choose from. This is exactly the kind of initiative the Government should be using to improve representation for ethnic people.
According to the Government every single member and chair is an Aucklander, yet the make-up of CCO boards announced does not acknowledge the over 20 percent of Aucklanders of ethnic descent.
This insensitivity is not acceptable to the wider ethnic community of Auckland, who have contributed hugely to the cities economic development.
These nominations were invited from Mayors of all Auckland territorial authorities, the chair of the Auckland Regional Council, Ministers, as well as the Ministers of Women’s Affairs, Consumer Affairs, and Pacific Island Affairs, Te Puni Kökiri, the Offices of Ethnic Affairs and Disabilities and the Treasury.
I question how robust this nomination process was, because the CCO board certainly does not reflect the diversity of Auckland city.
Are you advocating that stupid oxymoron known as “positive” discrimination?
Ben are you advocating that its ok for CCO’s not to reflect the makeup of the communities they are supposed to represent? And to not even make an effort in this regard so that you don’t have to raise the issue of “that stupid oxymoron known as ‘positive descrimination?”
Women are really under-represented too. Not one woman chair and only a handful of women directors.
How about best person to do the job regardless of race or sex or whatever
[Trolling, deleted - admin]
Seems like Rodney Hide would like the CCOs to look like his preferred ACT caucus.
I guess it depends upon the pool the nominations were chosen from… Surely that information could be attained by someone. Such information would most likely give a better indication of the broader representation of minorities and women in the process…
Darien, at least a couple of the women are deputy Chairs, hopefully the accepted protocol of Deputies being Chairs once the Chair steps aside will hold true here.
It’s ok Loota, cos these white guys and a few white gals, with Tuku thrown in, know what’s best for us…
I know, I know, Ben HATED H Clark for acting like she knew what was best for us, but it;’s not that he doesnt like a leader who acts like they know what’s best for us (Hide, Key, Joyce), he doesn’t like a woman leader to act that way.
Hope that clears up any confusion.
They don’t have to reflect the racial makeup of their constituency in order to do a good job of serving the needs of their constituency. It simply is not logical to think that ones race is a neccessary component of being a good chairman or director.
Lootas comment and the post in general is irrational, to put it kindly.
Any director/chairman who adequately provides for the basic needs of ratepayers ie. roads, sanitation, etc. at the lowest cost to the ratepayer is doing a good job.
Culture and all the rest of it can be taken care of by the inhabitants and the more money left in their pockets to do so the better for their culture whatever that may be.
Labour have no chance of credibility while they keep spouting this sort of nonsense.
{Deleted. You are misrepresenting the post and making offensive accusations. Consider this a warning. Grant}
4th Tower
Thanks for that. I feel better now that it’s just a coincidence the majority of jobs/positions have gone to white men and a smattering of white women. Phew. I guess it just confirms that women and non white men are only poorly represented cos they are just not good enough to do these jobs.
25% of the population with 86% of the jobs, and even higher representation in the top level jobs. I dont know why the outcry recently about boys struggling at school
http://werewolf.co.nz/2009/07/worth-fighting-for/
@ Tracey, Classy, Lets avoid the issues and instead resort to petty defamation, for the record you don’t know the first thing about me, as it happens one of the boards I sit on has a woman as Chairman and she does a very good job, better than many male chairs, so as usual your talking ****
@ Loota, I’m advocating people who can get the job done and done well given there is millions of dollars at stake, I couldn’t care less what race/ethnicity etc… they are or aren’t and I frankly think the suggestion that we should need to specifically appoint on that basis is incredibly offensive and insulting, many of my friends who are in minority groups hate this sort of daft labour policy as much as I do. I have one friend who is part maori and a registrar, who is super sharp and didn’t get into Med school through alternative entry but nevertheless when dealing with patients has people treat her like she is “one of those doctors”
“On Sunday morning 30 June there was a really interesting discussion about pay equity on national radio (should be one their website). One of the speakers had just completed research on pay equity and had statistics showing pay inequity still exists. What I found most surprising (as a young male professional) was that in nearly all professions, women grads were paid less than their male counterparts. This really shocked me as I had assumed that gender was no issue for grads, and that this sort of stuff stopped in the 80s.” this is from June 2009
Ben, are some of your best friends Maori too, so that means Maori are not discriminated against? How many boards that you sit on do not have a woman Chair and/or what component of women on those Boards? Please name the Boards to which you refer.
I note you didnt deny that you thought Clark acted like she knew what was best for us, but you’re fine with key and Hide and Joyce for the same thing? (wink)
I think you lost any moral high ground on the petty and defamatory front in your response.
My comment was actually on point. Women being under represented is a deeper issue than is being traversed in this thread, by 4th Tower int he first instance.
Do you realise how patronising some of your comments come across, regardless of whether you mean it this way or not…
We have a woman Chair “and she does a very good job” – which actually proves my point as much as you think it proves yours.
“I have one friend who is part maori and a registrar, who is super sharp and didn’t get into Med school through alternative entry but nevertheless when dealing with patients has people treat her like she is “one of those doctors”” Again, doesnt this prove our point?
Ben said:
You’re insulted? You? Forgive me if I don’t have sympathy just because you think that white middle aged males are the most competent and best people to run AKL’s CCOs (certainly Hide thinks that way). Its women and ethnic groups who have actual cause to feel insulted for being left out of a fair and transparent appointment process, not a rigged, closed one.
And I believe that they should be doubly insulted especially for your implication that they shouldn’t hold positions where “millions of dollars (are) at stake”.
I love how you jump to the defence of closed processes and their predictably biased results.
Do you think Hide’s appointees had to submit CV’s and go through a rigorous selection process or did he just phone them up and say, hey do you want it mate?
Having said that I really appreciated your heart warming story about your nice part Maori woman doctor friend who is “super sharp”, not exactly sure what the relevance of this side tale was to running AKL city, however with your support of Hide’s stance your friend would never get on an Auckland CCO.
Oh dear that saying about not getting into the mud with pigs springs to mind, I’m not going to waste my time re-clarifying your blatant misrepresentations of what I actually said.
I don’t think I’m going to post here any longer either, I thought this would be a good means of having productive debate but frankly this whole site is littered with the reactionary, the naive and the foolish with a warped and disturbed view of society and the very idea of the likes of Tracey and Loota having impact on public policy would certainly keep me awake at night.
(p.s don’t forget to copy and paste the bit where I talk about warped etc… and try and link it to the right wing etc…. as a tragic witty retort)
So Ben before you go, do you think Hide’s appointees had to submit CV’s and go through a rigorous selection process or did he just phone them up and say, hey do you want it mate?
And would your super sharp Maori woman doctor friend (or someone else similar to her) be able to get selection on to a CCO? Given that she is not middle aged, white or male?
I’m just saddened that many people, mainly men (and some women), believe that women have reached full equality, and Pacific Island, and Maori and and and
@sweetd – yes, best person to do the job, but are you really saying that among the 50% of women who make up New Zealand there wasn’t one who qualified?
Darn I was looking forward to knowing which Boards you are on, how many male versus female Chairs, and how many male versus female Board members.
“are you really saying that among the 50% of women who make up New Zealand there wasn’t one who qualified?”
That’s a “coincidence” Darien.
Danien
No, I am not saying that, but why do you assume that just because you do not have an equal number of whatever, you do not have the best available talent?
@Tracey/Darien do you think there should be chairs reserved for women or something? How do you fix that girls are already educated as equally as us and are apparently outperforming us and they are as legally allowed to as we are so what more can be done to get women in power?
Is this your first post Ashraf?
The supercity is a disaster, lack of ethnic and women’s representation are all part of the mess!
@Dylan – there’s a lot that can be done to support women getting into power, but it takes men to support the idea as much as women.
Agreed, there are still some sexist men out there
Seeing as these are government appointments- I would like to know what if any influence the Minister of Women’s Affairs had on these appointments and if she was even consulted- because it doesn’t look like it.
LOL
@Principessa : Really good question. One for me to ask our erstwhile Minister, Pansy Wong.
Who also happens to be the Minister of Ethnic Affairs funnily enough.
@ Grant – Im sorry – I have to disagree with you. The post is about calling for people of ethnic origin being on the board (or more to the point stating that it is not acceptable to ” the wider ethnic community of Auckland” that there is not.
Im saying people should be selected for their skills – not their ethnic origin. When one does call for this simply because of race – it is indeed racist.
Dylan
with 25% of the population (white men) holding about 86% of the jobs (estimates) and even greater percentage in management roles, then it stands to reason that men are doing alot of the hiring. The statistics suggest that many men still favour other men in their hiring practices. Not surprising as people tend to favour others like them.
Interestingly when a study was done a few years ago they found that while people favour those like them, women and people of ethnicity were more likely to hire people NOT like them than white men are.
Hopefully your generation and those, say under 30 now, will hold quite different views. I think they do and will, but they’re not dominating hiring yet.
Why does everyone think that having someone of your race/sex there mean that you’re better represented? Such logic is fallacious. You are represented by the person you voted for (if they get in but that’s another failure of representative democracy). If a Maori woman voted for John Banks then she is represented by John Banks and not by a Maori or a woman who she didn’t vote for.
These CCO directors and chairs don’t represent Aucklanders because Aucklanders didn’t vote for them – they were appointed by the dictatorial National and Act parties who presently compromise central government.
Draco, you are literally correct BUT the woman who voted for Banks had very limited choice, for example, which woman ran for Mayor in the last election, and which Maori? Both Brown and Banks are closely aligned with the two main wellington parties.
@Draco ‘Why does everyone think that having someone of your race/sex there mean that you’re better represented?’ Your right there a man concerned over womens issues or a white man concerned over asians issues is sufficient representation of those people. But the rest of your comment is pretty bizzare, I don’t see how if you vote for someone they are all of a sudden representing you. They represent your vote but not necasserily your views or issues, if a man who doesn’t care about womens issues gets alot of women voting for him he won’t suddenly have a change of heart. We have limited choices here.
@Spud so what are we meant to do about the sexist men?
@Tracey ‘with 25% of the population (white men) holding about 86% of the jobs’ – That’s a pretty shocking figure, I would want to know how many of those women are stay at home mothers/wives though. And about the hiring thing Asians will obviously hire people not like them because they are a minority and most of the population/potential employees are white.
@Dylan, some of them can’t be helped, they’re old and set in their ways. The others can be reeducated or put in a situation where they are forced to be outnumbered by women
– just off the top of my head, am very pissed, might have better ideas when I’m sober 
I think that chicks and minorities should have the right to represent their own kind. Yes, someone of a different demographic could do it, but it’s great to lift a minority up and give it a chance
@Draco – “These CCO directors and chairs don’t represent Aucklanders because Aucklanders didn’t vote for them – they were appointed by the dictatorial National and Act parties who presently compromise central government” – you’re right about that, but it doesn’t meant that a bunch of blokes are the only ones who could have done the job.
@Spud Hmmm old and set in their ways? Then hopefully our generation will be able to give women a better go.
I have my own wee theory developed on sexist men from watching my own attitudes as I have grown up. I think it’s a little too long to post on here though
Aw
You’ve got me curious 
But I respect your decision 
You jafas can argue all you want, the rest of the country couldn’t give a toss.
Tracey & Loota.
Did either of you read what Ben had to say? Positive discrimination is wrong for so many reasons. In any position, in any circumstance, I want the best person for the job, regardless of Race, gender, religion or orientation.
If the best person for the job is a Gay Bhuddist Maori, then so be it. If the best person for the job is a middle class white male professional, and he doesnt get the role because the powers that be want the holder of the position to be “more representational”, then the organisation suffers.
If you want to see the damage that a politically correct appointee can do, we only need look at what Peter De Villiers has done with the world champion springboks.
slightlyright – I simply find it strange that Ben riled against “positive descrimination” and the bias it might lead to, when it is not at all what happened in AKL and is a distant hypothetical at best.
But then said nothing about the closed, opaque process which lead to actual bias in AKL, and is hard cold reality today.
It a storm in a tea cup when Len Brown wins we can expect to see the current CCO chairs canned and followng CCO chairs appointed:
Tama Iti
Raybon Kan
John Tamihere
Penny Bright
Leila Haare
Matt McCarten
and better throw in a token white guy:
Michael Cullen
@ slightlyrighty I think Loota and Tracey very much understand that, the question is why are the right men for the job always white male heterosexuals. You have to be ready to say that this either because A. white male heterosexuals are more capable people for leadership roles or B. discrimination is occuring on people who aren’t white male heterosexuals because other kinds of people should be just as capable. Or C. It’s all one great big coincidence.
By saying these people are there because they are right for the job is saying that white men do the job better because positions of leadership are full of white men. I’m pretty sure Darien cleared that up ages ago.
Would you not class these are political appointments.
I would hope the task they have ahead is to undo the stuctural propensity for privatisation.
No one has observed the imbalance of values and economic class in these appointments.
Positive discrimination is an unbounded term.
Racial quotas – OK if they are all right wing business types bent on privatising the CCOs with careful management towards that event TINA scenario.
Councils should represent by way of voting procedures.
Managers of any CCO ( until they are dismantled ) should be appointed through a process of Council recruitment just like any other employee with a clear examination of each ones skills and direction.
Pay inequity is much wider than comparision by sex, age or race. I think there is another elephant in the room.