The great thing about being in government is that you can take action to do things, or stop things or change things that you think are important. It’s the privilege that goes with the responsibility. But the current government seems to approach a number of issues as if they were commentators at a rugby game, saying something about an issue but in actual fact not doing anything at all.
Two examples from this weekend. The first and most transparent being the transport debacle that David has already posted on. On Friday Murray McCully was full of confidence about the state of Auckland transport, and seemed to be taking some ownership of what he saw as a success waiting to happen. It of course did not turn out that way.
Now of course this is not all the Government’s problem. The successful running of infrastructure for RWC was always going to be a matter for both local and central government to manage. Len Brown fronted on Saturday morning and apologised. All we have seen from Murray McCully, the Minister for the Rugby World Cup is comment on how bad things were and that they should be better. Why have a Minister for the Rugby World Cup if you are not going to play your part in making things work, and in taking some responsibility when they don’t?
The more subtle version of this tactic came from John Key in response to the reluctance of insurance companies to pay out for Christchurch homeowners to rebuild. Mr Key is quoted in the Press as saying he was “bothered” by the stance that the companies were taking. Is he auditioning for Catherine Tate or something? If you are bothered you are the one in a position to do something about it. For god’s sake man you are the Prime Minister not some talkback radio caller. Do something.
There are other examples, like the PM saying National could do better in terms of the number of women on on the National Party list. I know, why doesn’t he talk to someone who could show some leadership on this, like the Leader of the National Party?
The Prime Minister and his Ministers are not interested spectators in how our country runs, they are the people who have their hands on the levers of power. They should be held to account for what they do, not just that they have had something to say on the matters of the day.
Fine sentiment, Grant, but those whose full time, protected and privileged professional job it is to hold the government “to account for what they do”, the press gallery, are either in cahoots with the government, or polishing their career egos. So it’s down to you guys, I guess. To quote the Hon. Earl K. Long, former Governor of the great state of Louisiana, ‘what are you going to do about it’?
First Grant, the Government does not run the transport in Auckland, and second, neither does it run the insurance industry. You should stick to commenting on what politicians have some responsibility for.
Is the Auckland City , private transport management company an example of the PPP that national is so enamored with???
Richard you ask an interesting question. What is this govt responsible for?
” the press gallery, are either in cahoots with the government, or polishing their career egos”. Really? Its the medias fault? Look in the mirror Labour and your dwindling band of supporters. This kind of ‘blame everone else for their misfortunes” mentality is why this country has a handout mentality instead of a ‘can do’ mentality. What pathetic dribble.
@RTF. While I might disagree with you as to what the government’s role or options are in these cases, you are in fact making the same point I am making. If these really aren’t the role of government why is the PM commenting on them? The thing I am trying to get across is the political tactic of a Minister acting as a commentator to give the impression they are doing something.
Lou Peters, do you believe that any party can “make” the media print or publish anything they want? I mean is it ACT’s choice to be reported disproportionately (to voting numbers) to say, the Greens or is it it an editorial decision?
I certainly dont lay the blame for Labour’s current position at the medias door in toto but nor do I delude myself that editorial decisions don’t play a part in policy/releases/comments “I” get to read, hear or view.
I also don’t know which New Zealand you live in. The one I live in is full of hard working people with great work ethic and a do the very best they can mentality. It is you who does them a disservice by buying into the myths that a significant number of NZers are not, then paint everyone with that brush and repeat it as though it is magically fact rather than opinion. This Government got in partly on that and you are acting as their town cryer instead of rationally analysing what they have done on the back of what they promised and whether they could improve. Remember this was going to be a “do” government not a “talk” government.
Even their supporters on here are reluctant (if not refuse) to list their 2008 promises with corresponding implementation.
“the Government does not run the transport in Auckland, and second, neither does it run the insurance industry. ”
The Government can exert moral suasion, use its CERA powers, or simply pass laws and regulations. It is absolutely within the power of government to affect the outcome of issues in transport or insurance or any other area of life in New Zealand. Off the top of my head, Brownlee could be subsidising legal aid for Avonside residents who have been shafted, the Government could be setting up an insurer of last resort for those whose current insurers are being unco-operative, the Government could pass laws setting out how insurance contracts are to be interpreted where the effect is in doubt, or CERA could set up a compensation process for those who can show genuine loss of equity.
Likewise, the Government has been meddling heavily in Auckland local government and transport for nigh on 3 years and could have done things very differently. They chose to leave things to a brand new merged local government that is trying to get its organisational shit together saddled with policy decisions that leave too much in private company structures.
“We are disappointed but it’s not our area” does not cut it when it comes from the government. This is a position based on ideology, not in a factual assessment of the powers available.
John Key and his Ministers do this, because it works. It shouldn’t, but sadly it does.
Every Monday the PM’s post-Cabinet press conference descends into farce (masochists can follow the audio on the Scoop website) …
Journalists: “There’s a problem, what is your answer?”
PM: “Yes, I want answers! Because I care!”
(afterwards)
Journalist to audience: “A determined John Key today said he wanted answers …”
I can’t help but admire the breathtaking cynicism. Key knows the media have the attention span of a goldfish, and the answer doesn’t really matter (because the news cycle will have moved on).
It’s bad government, but successful politics. Call it “Keyism”: perception is all, solutions irrelevant.
The policy around insurance and Auckland transport is obviously either non-existent or not rigorous enough to deal with those two situations. What those two completely different things have to do with each other is beyond me.
If Mr Robertson is concerned with either of the aforementioned issues then he should consider drafting legislation and/or campaigning on those issues.
The PM can comment on whatever he likes. He’s the PM. Labour need to stop quibbling over nonsense like this and pick its fights more wisely – it just comes off as petty bitchiness. Maryan Street has recently been concerned with the plight of gay people in Uganda. While she may consider that to be within her sphere of concern as foreign affairs for Labour I’d suggest there are more pressing issues.
Richard I, if the government doesn’t run Auckland Transport, why the heck did they appoint 7 out of 9 directors. ( under special provisions that Hide rammed through)
Brown only got to put in two of his people , one of whom was C&R leader Christine Fletcher
Looks like the government runs Auckland Transport to me. If the hat fits wear it
“The thing I am trying to get across is the political tactic of a Minister acting as a commentator to give the impression they are doing something.”
Bla bla bla…
Oh for God’s sake, just grow some balls and tell us what you would have done, or what you would do instead.
And how you would be accountable for it.
@Curious, what they have to do with each other is the way in which Ministers have acted like commentators on the issues rather than actual doing something that is in their power to do.
And for the umptenth time this blog is not the be all and end all of what Labour is talking about. Its a blog, where we express our views on all manner of things, some serious, some not, sometimes the biggest issue of the day, sometimes something that has just occured. Check out this site if you want to see all the issues Labour is campaigning on. http://www.ownourfuture.co.nz
@ Grant Robertson
Oh so you were just commenting on it and not doing something about it…
The ministers are just acting like all “managers” that I’ve come across do: claim the credit when things go right, spread the blame when they go wrong.
This really does demonstrate that this shower view being in government as just another opportunity to generically manage, rather than actually feeling and caring for what they’re managing.
It’s also a very kiwi-management style: bluster in taking little notice of experts or informed opinion, then try to get the mess cleared-up afterwards, rather than thinking things through beforehand.
From an outsider’s perspective, the press statement of the Minister for the World Cup seems laughable. One word is almost completely missing: “we”: we made mistakes, we will work to do better next time, etc. This guy is the senior NZ government figure with responsibility for the event. So where is the leadership?
“Oh so you were just commenting on it and not doing something about it…” If he is, he is sadly taking his lead from the current PM who has turned out to be all talk and no “do”. Sadly his supporters appear to think that is what NZ needs.
Kind of like fiddling while Rome burns
It seems much of the problem with the disabled train in Auckland was secondary to the occupants pushing the emergency stop button. Also, sheer numbers of people impeded the efficient running of the service.
That these problems hadn’t been anticipated by central government and each button supplied with its own guard and more carriages arranged for this one occasion at public expense is, as you say, clearly the government’s fault and a national disgrace.
Maybe I’m just a bit slow, but perhaps the Government responds to questions by the media because the media pose the questions to the Government….
We’re living in a 24 hour news-cycle, what’s the easiest way for the media to give a story enough weight to publish it – by asking the PM about it.
@Grant – If you respond to a question, does that make you just a “commentator”? if the media asked you about anything under the sun, would your response be “I’m a Member of Parliament and don’t comment on such farcical matters” I highly doubt that.
So much for the “do” government which promised not to be a “talk” government
Who sold State Insurance to the Poms ?
and meanwhile, the tv “news” go on the attack on len brown… i know a few people in the council offices who are rightiously angry about the way johnny sparkle, and murray nobody are dumping all over them.. acting like they had nothing whatsoever to do with the planning and organisation…
this is one of the best examples of how cravenly. openly biased the news agencies have become…. this has been just another prime example of “blame labour” for the incompetence of their hero’s..as len is left leaning, he qualifies as de facto labour, so scapegoating him is perfectly acceptable…
i despair for this country, if this is what we can expect, then there isn’t much hope of a real future for us… our kids will be the serfs of the future.. i bet they are looking forward to that!!
@curious….. bit of advice to help you avoid traps for young players…. your party political slogans have got to have a basis in at least some tiny portion of reality to actually qualify as ant more than meaningless drivel…
@ Oliver, maybe that is so, but your logic suggests the media go to the government for comment in the first place, and run their comment, primarily because they are the government and can actually do something about the issue at hand. Conversely, they do not run the Opposition because they cannot actually do anything, much. So it seems to me that Grant has a genuine point here.
Where’s everyone camped outside the Transport Management Company offices, including brown, McCully, Joyce and the media??? Isn’t this why the private in PPP is so “vital” cos of accountability and reliability?
@ tracey, that’s not how it works. They meet in secret, hide behind commercial sensitivity, quietly threaten legal action, and bank the taxpayer or ratepayer cheques. If they screw up, there’s contract negotiations in five years’ time. Best example is the GFC, where Obama who was not even in office at the time, is now held personally responsible by the right wing for the economic melt-down. So poor old Len is in the gun, while the Tories who set up Auckland Transport and appointed the board and the Chairman, and the private sector boys who bank the cheques, head out for a long lunch someplace nice.
And amusing that the person engineering tomorrows report on transport will be Auckland transport chair mark ford. After the great work he Did Auckland council ( how much will the it fix actually cost?) I am sure he is the right person to comment on what happened. Not.
@ jennifer. And a free lunch as well no doubt. They are after all the ‘no free lunch’ for you but free banquets for me crowd a la Roger Douglas.
@ Williamsheridan, don’t be too hard on Mark One Ford, he’s only paid $600,000 a year. You know what they say, pay peanuts and get monkeys?
as was pointed out on 3News last night, since the govt have insisted on micro-managing the RWC arrangements, they can hardly pretend it’s nothing to do with them when somthing goes pear-shaped.
Yep Jennifer- money well spent for a Chair whose board signed off on all the planning for the 15,000 rail passengers
http://www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/about-us/board-members/Documents/AT-Agenda-Item-11(ii)-Open-RWC-Update-w-attachment1-29june11.pdf
…even though in the trial run they got more than 16,000 just going to the Bledisloe game i.e. not even allowing any for the opening ceremony at the waterfront. Wonder what the things were that were pointed out in the table-top exercise carried out…. no doubt “what if more people turn up” wasn’t one of the questions asked.
Check out also the communications commentary that says enhanced messaging communications for rail passengers were being worked on … obviously that didn’t involve messaging that anyone got last Friday
http://www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/about-us/board-members/Documents/AT-Agenda-Item-9-Open-Session-Business-Report-August.pdf
@ Dorothy, it appears not be so. Tory Lockwood ruled out a snap debate because the Minister of Transport has no ministerial responsibility for the train problems in Auckland on Friday. Tui billboard, anyone? Jackboot Joyce was crowing how he had demanded answers this morning, but now a few hours later, he has absolutely no responsibility? Bunch of Troy crooks, by the looks, closing ranks as usual.
Good post Grant – but John Key is taking his cues from Helen Clark, who was sooo frustrating at exactly the same thing – Clark and Key always act as if they are neutral commentators, instead of the person responsible for taking action to fix problems. The media must persist with follow up questions (Mary Wilson on National Radio is best at this).
Tracey – no, Auckland Transport is a CCO (Council Controlled Organisation) – a wholly owned subsidiary company of Auckland Council, not a PPP (Public Private Partnership). AT is just a renaming of Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA), which was a subsidiary of the old Auckland Regional Council (ARC).
The Transport Committee of Aucklnd Council sets transport policy, and Auckland Transport is supposed to implement those policies, by organising, planning and contracting companies or other agencies to provide the actual services.
Tragically, ARTA – now called AT – has proven woeful at planning big events, as they have little experience or understanding of large crowd dynamics. If they had more political activists on their staff, they may have a better grasp
(think about the well-managed 50,000 crowd at the last anti-mining demo in Auckland).
I guess this is action:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5616905/Government-seizes-control-of-Auckland-waterfront
The comments disregarding politics ability to influence the media seem very naive.
The wider pattern of what we are fed is a grooming exercise with exclusion of much information being obvious and pronounced.
Although this link needs updating with the organised collapse of NZPA further restricting our news sources, much of the information is still very relevant.
http://www.converge.org.nz/watchdog/15/05.htm
Around this weekend past we have been subject to a barrage of 911 propaganda, not only riddled with inaccuracies and falsehoods, but almost complete towing the US/anti Muslim line now refined to a dramatic fictional performance.
No analysis of the ridiculous asserting that planes brought down two WTC buildings was presented let alone examine the flimsy construction of named Arab hijackers, many of whom have been located alive since. The building were designed to withstand the impact of the largest planes and fire with a wide safety margin against loss of structural integrity.
Independent US research has shown there is a corruption of the facts officialdom has presented to the public and disregard of evidence collected by acknowledged experts in their relevant scientific fields.
Thousands of professionals including Architect. Engineers. Aviators, Military, Industrial Chemists and Analysts, Construction and Demolition experts and others; have joined a campaign to bring the truth to the public .
The US press and NZ press do not report this. Same control and agenda.
http://911expertsspeakout.org/
No mention in NZ media of the third building 47 story WTC7 which was not touched by a plane yet fell in the same way, pulverized into massive dust clouds containing evidence of explosives also. The free fall of these building is identical to those demolished professionally with explosives. You have all seen it on TV many many times during the propaganda. Time the fall.
This weekend past rallies are being held in many placed in the US and abroad to further expose the deception supported by the press and media about the 911 fiasco. Nothing of this reported in NZ media either.
Our TV and radio including national Radio have followed the US Administration directed line as the weekend has been used to bombard the public of NZ with this rubbish appealing to fear and emotion. All the classic propaganda tactics.
Would you entertain for a moment that there is not some political motive and political control influencing the media.
Although there is a vast amount of research and material available, no question of the Bush conspiracy about Arabs against US has been presented nor analysis of why NZ followed Bush into two unjustified wars.
There are many explanations given surrounding far more credible narratives of what happened at 911 and although a significant section of the US population affirm that they belief the Govt of the day was involved in the demolition of the buildings, non of this is presented to us in NZ by media.
Why is our media not examining this. Is that not their duty to present wider points of view rather that controlled political agenda.
Democracy requires education and information exposing all points of view.
“Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.” —Albert Einstein
@ Williamsheridan, it is only ‘action’ in the diversionary, Crosby Textor sense. McCully has been donkey deep in micro-managing the waterfront events, and has been suddenly ‘unavailable’ for comment since it turned to custard. Now he’s the hero, the big bully boy come to save us all. I guess his lapdog mates in the gallery and at granny Herald will swallow it, and beg him for more.
You can’t have it both ways Jennifer…. after crying about a lack of responsibility you now have it….. soak it up …. if things go wrong now you know who is responsible.
Jennifer, must you persist in being a name-calling misery guts? Life must be so unpleasant for you, but please don’t take it out on others who try to stick to the subject.
@ Richard, where all else fails, drag out the personal attack. Typical.
And that’s exactly what you always do. Name-calling is the last resort of the person with no argument.
Geez Jennifer. Pot kettle black.
Thanks for that bob. Does that mean it is different from the CCO’s which came in under the super city legislation or does it have a number of Rodney’s appointees? I’m genuinely getting confused here
williamsheridan – I guess it would be hard for any govt to criticise someone they appointed? Sadly in politics the more things change the more they stay the same.
RT1 in the end those who choose to name call only expose themselves and dilute their posting amongst those looking for information and dialogue. Some do it overtly (jennifer) and others cloak it. I just assume most people see it for what it is, annoying as it is.
Have you been away, hadn’t seen you for a while here and now you are back with avengeance, and a welcome sight your posts are too
Thanks Trace, I enjoy most of the comment here (intelligent) and sometimes stick my nose in where it’s not required. Some of the ‘left’ arguments are valid, and I guess we all make up our own minds in the end, where we stand. The only thing that annoys me is the labelling and name calling, something I try not to do, as every poster has an opinion and is entitled to it, but vituperation (good word) achieves nothing except exposing their lack of information and dialogue, as you say. No, haven’t been away, just a bit quiet, after learning I have emphysema, after 30 years smoking. Haven’t had even a puff for 22 years though, so it took its time.
Cheers Tracey.
Back at you RT1 – am heading up north for a four day break in mid October (during the RWC semi finals) – will happily avail myself of the holiday highway!!!!
I’m the youngest of 3 children and when my brothers would call me names mum would say to me “if they are calling you names they have no reasonable answer for you”
@Richard the First – Sorry to hear that
“There appears to be some action items out of the Bledisloe that were not actioned.” says the report today.
So who is responsible for that?…. the Board and its Chairman?
Perhaps Mr Ford was too busy investigating why his Watercare managers had broken protocols to follow up on whether his Transport employees were doing their job correctly?
Thanks spud.
It’s manageable though. There are a lot of people worse off than me.
williamsheridan – that’s why he gets the big bucks, cos the buck stops at the top
Having read todays front pager on the Canterbury earthquake royal commission I noted Bob Parker rushing to the defence of his National Party mates saying that the commission should not be a witch hunt or to apportion blame as to why sisemologists were unanble to warn Cantabrians of a further lage quake after the 7.1 in September . The truth is Dr Tweedie a Canty University sisemologist did issue a warning and was prompty told to shut up by none other than Gerry Brownlee . Brownlee was reported in the Press as saying that quake warnings were unhelpful .By the time the Febrary 22 quake hit Geologists and Seismologists had been effectively browbeaten into silence . Would a warning have saved the lives of the 162 people who died – who knowa . What we do know is WHY there was no warning .