Red Alert

Author Archive

The Paper Boy/Girl Tax Grab

Posted by Grant Robertson on May 25th, 2012

A revealing level of blame shifting and spin in John Key’s response to the Paper Boy/Girl Tax Grab. Here’s what he said in the NZ Herald today

Mr Key – a paperboy in his youth – said he found out about the move at Cabinet on Monday and did not regret it despite the publicity.

He found out on Monday? After the Budget had gone to print? Definitely a game of blame Bill going on here. I imagine the conversation at Cabinet on Monday must have gone something like this, ” Ah, John, we’ve got this thing called the Budget on Thursday. Nothing much for you to worry about….”

But, wait, there’s more Mr Key goes on to say

A lot of people didn’t know they were entitled to them so they didn’t bother claiming. The amounts were fairly small and overall we have been trying to clean up the tax code

Yes, that’s right the amounts are “fairly small”, that is the point! It’s tax on children who earn less than $45 a week, of course the amounts are small. That’s why the credit is there, so they can get those very small amounts back.

And yes some people didn’t bother claiming, but obviously quite a few did given that the government gets $14 million out of this.

What a load of spin and nonsense for a piece of penny pinching from the pockets of paper boys and girls.

Filed under: Budget, Tax

The Budget in pictures

Posted by Grant Robertson on May 24th, 2012

keyseconomicplan

Trying to find some time between speeches to write up a post on the Budget, but in the meantime this photo montage from a reader seems to get it about right.

Filed under: Budget

David Shearer takes fight to government

Posted by Grant Robertson on May 23rd, 2012

A great, feisty, funny general debate speech from David Shearer today. Well worth a watch.


Answering questions on loans and allowances

Posted by Grant Robertson on May 8th, 2012

I have been getting heaps of questions about Mr Joyce’s announcement last week. He does not seem of a mind to get into any details, so this is what I have been able to piece together. Feel free to get in contact with further questions. I have put quite a few in through the written question system where we have not been able to get other answers.

Is future eligibility going to be four years of allowances or 200 weeks?

Steven Joyce caused huge confusion last Thursday by talking about allowances stopping after four years. This was wrong. It is clear that the change he is proposing is to restrict allowances to 200 weeks. This would equate to five years of allowances for most undergraduate courses. This has acted as the default rate of allowances unless you were doing a “long course”. This includes most degrees, postgraduate and longer courses. If you were doing these courses you were eligible for another 50, 100 or more weeks worth of allowances depending on the length of the course. That is now gone.

If you have used up your 200 weeks already does this mean you will be ineligible for future allowances?

I asked Mr Joyce about a case such as this in Parliament today. He said the “final transitional arrangements will be confirmed in the Budget”, but he did go on to acknowledge that the example I gave (a real one) of a student who had used their 200 weeks already and was in the first year of a two year Masters programme would not be eligible for allowances next year.

How many people will be affected by the allowance changes?

Half an answer today as Mr Joyce admitted 4000 to 5000 postgraduate students would no longer be eligible for allowances. He did not give the number of those who would not get allowances because of the changes to parental income thresholds.

Can the government change the terms of student loan contracts that have already been signed to increase the repayment rate to 12% without the agreement of the borrower?

Sadly, yes. Clause 203 of the Student Loan Act says that the Act will override anything that is in a loan contract. The Act contains the repayment rate, but also has a clause 37(3) that says that if the rate is changed by regulation then that rate is deemed to be the rate rather than the one listed in the Act. So, basically the government can do anything it likes to a loan contract as long as it is in the Act. One small caveat is that, through Clause 20, they do have to inform borrowers of any changes to their loan contracts within seven months of the change. Let’s see if they manage that.

There have been a number of questions about limited full time students and how this effects them, which I am chasing up with the Minister. Will come back when I get the results.

As I said the other day I can not believe that Steven Joyce would make these announcements without more information being available. Its simply not fair on students, graduates and their families.


An irresponsible and cynical announcement

Posted by Grant Robertson on May 3rd, 2012

Today, Steven Joyce as Tertiary Education Minister announced changes to the student loan and allowances scheme. When I say announced, I mean that he held a media conference at which he told the assembled reporters about the changes. He did not produce any paper, apparently could not offer much in the way of figures to back up his announcement and gave some vague answers. He has finally late this evening released his notes which shed only a little light on proceedings.

This is irresponsible and cynical. Pre-budget announcements are nothing new, I know that, but if you are going to do do them, how about actually giving details about what you are going to do? Student support is one of those areas where the details matter to individual students and their families. Many students live financially fragile lives, and little changes mean a lot. For families trying to support their children and plan their future, announcements like this have significance. Judging by the questions I am getting on email and on Twitter people are confused, and it is no wonder.

The reason it is cynical is that this is about getting the bad news away before the Budget so that on the day Mr Joyce can show how he is putting some more money into research and certain courses. The robbing Peter part of the equation out of the way, it will be time to pay Paul on Budget Day.

As to the substance of the announcement, they are giving all graduates with loans a pay cut by increasing the repayment rate and they are cutting access to allowances, including limiting eligibility to four years. This is significant. This means no allowances for people in later years of studying medicine, engineering, architecture, veterinary science or for post graduate study or double degrees. In short the very things the government says it wants.

There are still loads of questions unanswered about the detail of the announcement (such as what happens to those in the middle of longer degrees, do four years of allowances at any time in the past make you ineligible from next year?) but the overall message is clear; this government simply sees tertiary education more as a cost to be cut than an investment in our collective future.


Slow Jam with the President

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 26th, 2012

Barack Obama and Jimmy Fallon in fine form last night in this sketch from Jimmy’s Late Night show. Fallon has a regular ’slow jam’ segment, and has Obama as his special guest on this one. Very funny, and great work from the President. The issue here is a proposal to increase the rate of interest on student loans, which the President is opposing. As he says

Now is not the time to make school more expensive for our young people

Let’s hope Steven Joyce is listening to that come Budget time.


Reflections on ANZAC morning

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 25th, 2012

600-Poppy 3D
I am just back from another moving and respectful Dawn Service here in Wellington. Right around the country tens of thousands of New Zealanders have been doing the same thing. I have reflected on the journey around ANZAC Day for me on Red Alert before. To me it is a day to remember, reflect and to hope for a peaceful future.

This morning the spouse of one of the diplomats at the service said that what she loved about the New Zealand services was that it could be relaxed and at the same time so moving. It is true here in Wellington that people wander up stand where and as they wish. There are a few seats, a small official party, but otherwise its a fully egalitarian event. The cup of tea afterwards at the Pipitea Marae is even more so.

Nice changes have been evident in recent years. I like that we now sing the Australian anthem along with the New Zealand one. I love that some of the remaining WW2 veterans are the ones who really belt out the Maori version of our anthem.

The parade has fewer veterans, but more family members. The crowd gets bigger, but the atmosphere does not change. I guess its kind of hard to change the dawn.

But most of all what I love is that it is a true community occasion, with all the generations represented. Wandering around as the day began to lighten up this morning I ran into families of all shapes and sizes. One boy said it was so early, he felt like it was really late. I know what he meant! Others were engaged in conversations about what different bits of the day meant. Others were taking the time to stroll through the grounds of Parliament and soak up another part of our history.

There was a small political element today that was not shied away from. The Wellington President of the RSA noted at the cuppa afterwards that this may have been the last service for The 7th battalion band who perform at ANZAC events in the region, and numerous other community events. They have had their very modest funding taken away. The penny pinching means that 7 of the 10 military bands around New Zealand will cease to exist from later this year. This is sad and wrong. There was some talk today that the band might continue to do ANZAC services without the backing of the military or the government. I hope they do, but more than that I hope the government reconsiders.

But overall this is not a day for politics. I get why some people still have mixed feelings about ANZAC Day. But I take my lead from the veteran I mentioned in the post linked to above. For him he was remembering his mates. This is a chance for the whole country to remember our mates- the past generations who made sacrifices. And to hope that future generations never need to face such things. Lest we forget.


Murdo MacMillan, a Labour man

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 21st, 2012

The Labour whanau was out in force on Friday in Wellington to farewell Murdo MacMillan who passed away this week. I imagine most political parties have someone like Murdo. The behind the scenes guy who just makes things happen. Murdo gave his adult life to the party as a member, organizer and Assistant General Secretary.

In my early days with the the Party I sought out Murdo for advice and guidance. He seemed to know everyone and everything, and was willing to share it.

At the funeral today we heard from his family that Murdo lived his life in line with his values. Inclusive, caring, with absolute adherence to his sense of fairness and justice.

More than anything Murdo always put Labour, our values and purpose ahead of himself. He never forgot why he was there. That’s something we could all do with remembering.

So, for all the doers and workers in political parties, I pay my respects to Murdo MacMillan, a true Labour man. Rest in peace kind and gentle man.


The Undergraduate Brain Drain?

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 15th, 2012

Interesting article today quoting Sir Peter Gluckman on a possible new element to the brain drain; students undertaking their undergraduate studies overseas.

In the absence of any real data on this its hard to say if there has been a spike in students going overseas to undertake undergraduate studies. Anecdotally there has been an increased presence of Australian universities holding recruitment sessions at some schools. Just how many students are taking them up is a piece of information worth knowing, and I welcome Sir Peter looking into it.

One thing is for sure and that is that Australian universities are now operating in an environment where targeting New Zealand students makes sense. They have had a number of funding increases in recent budgets and are operating in an uncapped environment when it comes to enrolments. Add to that the ease with which New Zealand students can enrol and be treated as domestic students in terms of fees, and the incentives are there on both sides.

All of which makes Steven Joyce’s comments in this story just bizzare. He says

Joyce said the election promise had not been about stopping the brain drain, but increasing the success of the New Zealand economy so more people felt they could be successful here.

”It doesn’t apply to undergraduates, it applies to people earning high incomes in New Zealand,” he said.

First off it is simply untrue to say National did not campaign on stopping the brain drain. Take a look at the billboards Mr Joyce, that is exactly what they promised. And the opposite has occured.

Moreover his laissez faire attitude to the departure of undergraduate students is bizarre. They are the future earners of high incomes! We have a hard enough time keeping our best and brightest here without waving them goodbye at 18.

Regardless of the accuracy of the claim of undergraduate flight, we do need to take another look at how we invest in the tertiary sector to ensure that we are getting the best outcomes for students and for New Zealand as a whole. There does need to be a focus on both ensuring equity of access and developing world class institutions. More from me on that soon. But in short we also need to see the sector as a key part of our economic growth agenda, not some drain on the country;s finances.

When I listen to Steven Joyce I sometimes feel that the whole tertiary education thing is a bit of nuisance to him, (eg his moves to “dampen demand” and the budgeted decline in tertiary funding) rather than the opportunity for economic and social progress that it should be.


What’s going to happen to student loans/allowances?

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 4th, 2012

Earlier in the year the Prime Minister said the government was going to rein in the student loan scheme “big time”. He refused to say what this specifically meant, but it is clear the government has plans. Having decided that they can’t do what they really want to do in terms of getting rid of the interest free part of the scheme they have made a number of changes to limit eligibility, such as stopping those 55 and over borrowing for the living costs portion of the loan.

But there is more to come. In answer to a written question I put in about reports that the Minister of Tertiary Education had received about changes to student support, came this answer from Steven Joyce.

I have received many reports and briefings regarding future student support arrangements since 1 August 2011, if the Member would care to be more specific I will endeavor to provide a response. However, the Member should note that many of these will relate to future Budget decisions and therefore will not be released prior to Budget day.

So students can expect changes to be announced on Budget Day. Rumours abound as to what the changes will be. I have heard talk of major changes around allowances that would effectively wipe them out in favour of loans. This would be hugely controversial and create major equity issues. Moreover it would have the effect of massively increasing the student loan balance which would seem to be the opposite of the government’s policy objective.

More likely is an implementation of National’s election manifesto statement about student loans that

Ensure students who borrow from the scheme are working towards qualifications that can attract an income that allows them to pay back the loan.

This relates to the already announced plans to publish the salaries of people with particular qualifications. It raises huge concerns. What courses will not be eligible for student loans? What time scale will be used to identify the income? Will other factors will be taken into account to assess the value of a course?

I am all for ensuring that tertiary education plays a major part in providing the skilled workforce that we need. I also think we need to keep a careful eye on the quality of courses, but that is not the same as saying students can only borrow for courses that attract a particular income. The salaries earned by graduates are not the be all and end all of the value of tertiary education. Bob Jones famously once said he would rather employ an arts graduate than a commerce graduate because they had been taught to think.

We need to have a wider view of the value of tertiary educaiton, firstly for the individuals concerned and what they learn, but also for society as a whole of having people who have undertaken a range of courses. We want musicians, designers, artists or whatever it might be that the Minister considers is not earning enough, don’t we? They might not have huge financial benefit, but they are important in a civilised society.

Budget Day could be very interesting, and possibly disturbing ifor students and future students.


Launch of Wellington Branch of Howard League

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 4th, 2012

Last night I spoke at the launch of the Wellington Branch of the Howard League for Penal Reform. The launch was hosted by Charles Chauvel at Parliament on Monday night and was standing room only.

The Howard League has a great history in New Zealand of advocating for humane conditions in prisons and for wider issues of prison and justice reform. At the launch Peter Williams QC gave a passionate speech recalling this history. You can find out more about the origins of the League on their website.   If you are in Wellington and want to get involved in the Branch you can drop me an email at grant.robertson@parliament.govt.nz and I can put you in touch with the organisers.

Charles spoke at the launch about the Labour Party’s commitment to penal reform and to an integrated approach across the justice sector.   As our spokesperson for the sector his responsibilities cover Attorney General, Justice, Corrections and Courts.   This is an important shift for Labour to see these as part of an overall picture.  Charles is doing a great job of pulling all this together.

My remarks at the launch were very much my personal views on what needs to change in our correctional system. I also spoke about my own connection with the prison system. As has been written about before, my father spent some time in prison when I was younger. What I saw and heard about our prisons then has affected me to this day.

Last year Bill English said that prisons had been a fiscal and moral failure. He is right. The real challenge is to do something about it.

My speech is over the break (more…)

Filed under: justice

McCully’s actions a disgrace

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 25th, 2012

I’ve spent a bit of the weekend talking and thinking about Murray McCully. Its not something I choose to do that often! But bar for the Nick Smith saga last week, I think the actions of Murray McCully would have had a great deal more attention- and I am sure they will get that attention in the coming weeks.

Last week Murray McCully wrote a letter to the Chief Executive of Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade telling him that he opposed some of the changes he was proposing to the Ministry and describing various things he wanted to happen. The language was as media said “strongly worded”, and at times barbed.

This letter was then released to the media. Talking to former senior public servants no one could recall an action like this. It is a direct attack on a person who can not really respond.

Beyond that it is a farcical abdication of responsbility from McCully. He is the Minister. It is his government that gave the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade the target on finding $40 million (or $25 million as he claims) in cuts. It is not credible that the change programme in Foreign Affairs would have progressed to the point it did without McCully’s direct and continuing involvement. A Spokesperson for MFAT as good as confirmed that in the Dominion Post article linked above on Thursday.

the ministry has been “in discussions with Government throughout the process and they have provided clear direction on their priorities and expectations.

But McCully has tried to run for cover in the House and in the media, and dump all over John Allen. Now, it has to be said the way change process has been run has been disastrous. Many of the changes seem ill-thought out or just plain bizarre. Staff morale has collapsed. As I have said before I agree change was needed at MFAT, but this process has done far, far more harm than good.

John Allen and the senior leadership team at MFAT have to take their share of the blame for this. But so does Murray McCully. As the Sunday Star Times editorial (can’t find on-line) put it today his actions are a “disgrace”.


RIP Paul Callaghan

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 24th, 2012

It’s impossible to overstate the contribution that Paul Callaghan has made to New Zealand as a scientist, teacher, innovator, conservationist, thinker, writer and promoter of ideas. He had a vision and a drive to share it.

Beyond this he was a wonderful, wise and funny human being. I am grateful for the legacy he has left New Zealand to dream big for our future as a country built on talent, ideas and protecting and enhancing our environment.

A man of courage who I was proud to know. Rest in Peace Paul.


Behind every good diplomat…

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 12th, 2012

In the midst of the train wreck that has been the changes to MFAT, the treatment of partners of MFAT staff has been disrespectful, if not downright disgraceful. Remarkably, early on after the release of the change document the MFAT partners group were told that they were excluded from contributing to the so-called consultation process. They were reduced to asking for information under the Official Information Act. This is a huge slap in the face for people who put their lives on hold to accompany partners overseas, and often play an essential and unpaid role in advancing New Zealand’s interests overseas.

Tonight they have released an open letter to CEO John Allen. Just how significant an impact going on a posting has on couples is in some of the statistics in the letter

- 100% of responding partners (83) were or had been in full time employment in NZ or their country of origin.
- Of these, only 1 had not had to resign from their employment to join their partner on posting.
- Only 14 partners had been able to find comparable employment – either on posting or return to NZ (i.e. 83% had not).
- 55% of partners had been in a NZ superannuation scheme, of which 61% had had to leave or suspend the scheme to accompany their MFAT partner on posting.
- 83% of partners felt they were in a worse position in terms of their current employment status compared to what they could have expected had they not been an MFAT partner.

What comes through the most in the partners submission is just how hurt they are that they have been excluded. MFAT has struggled over the years to get its family friendly policies right, but this is a whole other level. The conclusion of the letter is worth quoting in full

Through the restructuring proposals you are putting at issue the question of how New Zealand can best achieve its foreign policy objectives and provides services to New Zealanders abroad. This includes securing vital objectives such as obtaining a seat on the Security Council and the securing of trade and economic agreements on which the country critically depends. We do not for a moment question that there are aspects of MFAT that are in need of change. However our only possible conclusion, from the changes you have proposed, is that you have not understood the impact your proposals will have on the Ministry’s ability to attract and retain partnered staff. Refusal to properly consider and understand the impact of your proposals on the commitment of staff and their partners and families to the Ministry would be deeply irresponsible.

There is some hint that the government might be about to back down on aspects of its proposals. Good. How about relenting and getting the partners view included as part of the process as well?


The Demise of the Blue and Gold

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 28th, 2012

I thought I had witnessed Otago’s darkest day in rugby. It was 1979 and Steve Marfell the strapping Marlbrough 2nd-five lined up a penalty that would have sunk Otago into the 2nd Division South with the likes of Buller and North Otago. He missed and over the years following Otago built up an enviable record under the likes of Laurie Mains, Gordon Hunter and latterly Tony Gilbert. But now Otago rugby stands on the edge of oblivion- at least in the short term. It is truly shocking for those of us who grew up in awe of the blue and gold.

The truth is that the professional era for rugby has never really been kind to Otago. In the years following 1996 there was a legacy of player strength that carried Otago to an NPC title a couple of years later, but it soon became clear that retaining players was going to be a struggle. As the performances of the team declined, so did the crowds, and no doubt the sponsorship revenue. Player payments went up and up, and the cost of retaining Carisbrook as a facility also grew. That much I can see, what on earth else was going on to see the debt rise so much I have no idea. This must have been some pretty shocking decisions taken in the last few years to see it get this bad.

The NZRU seem likely to ensure club and school rugby will continue, and that as Clare and David have pointed out, must be a priority.

As for the ITM Cup (NPC) team I think it is important that something is done to try to field a team this year. This might well be the opportunity to see the wider community come back in behind the team. With local commercial support as the base, maybe Otago people can be given the opportunity to help get the team on the field. The rest of the year then needs to be spent establishing a more sustainable base for the future.

But the real question that does have to be answered is the sustainability of professional rugby at the provincial level. Chris Laidlaw has made the case that we pretty much can not afford it, and there is evidence to back that up. Many provinces are really struggling, and as we can see in Otago’s case, it can have massive consequences. But what would a return to amateur rugby mean for provincial teams? The looming private ownership of Super 15 franchises will put more distance between local rugby and the professional game, and the chances of money earned professionally coming back to support the game will reduce.

The NZRU urgently need to re-look at the model for the game here to ensure that it survives and thrives at a local level. They tell us that is their goal- now is the time to take stock and make good on that commitment.

Filed under: sport

Where’s Murray?

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 27th, 2012

This morning John Key, responding to criticism that Foreign Minister Murray McCully is missing in action as his Ministry is radically restructured and as his emails remain a matter of interest, told the world:

I have absolutely no clue where he is

This is a serious situation. Losing someone like Kate Willinson, now that happens most days, but losing a Foreign Minister is a whole other thing. I’m sure the PM has tried emailing him on the Gmail. The whole country needs to lend a hand to help find Murray. A possible sighting has been reported, and an image sent through to us to help in the search. If you know where in the world is Murray, please let us know.

wheres-murray

(Click the image to enlarge it)


MFAT- Privatisation and the end of diplomacy

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 26th, 2012

When I was working at MFAT I was invited to be part of one of the many reviews that have taken place to re-look at the organisation. A very earnest consultant hired for the job asked the assembled group of MFAT staff to tell her what it was like when we first started. No one said anything for a while before I piped up and said. “Its like being shown into a dark room full of furniture. You spend all your time banging into the furniture, and no one turns on the light. Eventually you learn to navigate your way around the furniture, before they pick you up and put you in a room with the furniture differently organised and the process begins again.” The consultant decided to move on to a different exercise.

MFAT is an organisation that has been in need of change. It has operated for too long as an old boys club where innovation was stifled, postings were handed out like favours and time served ruled all. John Allen’s appointment as CEO gave some grounds for optimism. In his early days many staff warmed to the idea of change.

Now as the major change process is unleashed, morale is at an all time low, and the possibility of enhancing and improving our diplomatic service has been all but ruined by an abysmal process, and a drastic, ideological slash and burn exercise. Having talked to a number of my former colleagues its not possible to overstate what the impact of this process will be. We will lose a significant number of highly capable people.

This exercise effectively ends the notion of a diplomatic service. Those who go on postings have no guarantee of jobs on their return. The support on postings that has allowed families to stay together is being slashed. What’s more it appears to be being slashed while families are away on posting. One friend has calculated a 40% effective pay cut. Long serving local staff, paid a small wage that is vital to their families and villages are being dumped, all in the name of an experiment.

Meanwhile back at home, a large exercise in privatisation is to be launched. Anything from the management of property and assets, some aspects of Ministerial visits, managing staff transitions and other HR functions is all to be contracted out. This kind of contracting out has seen huge cost blowouts internationally. Moreover it won’t work. I will bet you anything that when the first logistical disaster involving a Minister occurs as a result of a private provider just not getting what is needed, it will all be back in-house.

I could go on and on. Suffice to say a pretty much unfettered free market model is to be unleashed at MFAT, and to hell with what it might mean for New Zealanders, our relationships developed over decades or our reputation on the world stage. This is nonsensical, unproven and such a lost opportunity. It also gives a hint to the further privatising of the public sector that lies ahead. This second term National government is going to make the 90s restructuring look like child’s play.


22.2.11- One Year On

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 22nd, 2012

Today is a day to think of Christchurch and Canterbury. To remember those who lost their lives, those who were hurt and injured, and to those who lost much that they knew of their lives and livelihoods. The first anniversary of such a tragedy will be tough for many of those affected to handle. Our hearts go out to them.

What we learned in the hours, days, weeks and months that have followed is the incredible strength, determination and spirit of the people of Canterbury. That is needed now more than ever. As is the support from the rest of New Zealand. At 12.51 today I think all New Zealanders should take a moment to remember the tragedy, and re-affirm our collective commitment to stand beside the people of Christchurch and Canterbury.

As Brendon Burns remarked in a post just one week on from the 22nd of February, “There are hard days ahead. Kia kaha to us all.”


Sunday Sport: The Summer of Guptill

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 19th, 2012

For non-cricket fans, I have some bad news. The New Zealand cricket summer actually only started this weekend. What has come so far with a woeful Zimbabwe team was merely the curtain raiser to the main event, the arrival of the South Africans, the second ranked test team and third ranked one day team in the world.

The first taste was Friday night, with a commanding win by New Zealand in the T20 game in Wellington. Before we get too carried away, T20 is not really the South Africans favoured format. They are ranked fifth compared to our second in the ICC rankings. But the Black Caps looked as good as they have all summer.

There are some impressive signs. Doug Bracewell and Tim Southee are charging into the bowling crease. Kane Williamson is looking accomplished. But towering above them all is Martin Guptill. He is in the richest vein of form you could find, averaging over 100 in international cricket for the summer. Watching him on Friday night, in a form of the game that challenges a cricket purist, almost every stroke that Guptill played was a genuine cricket shot, with impeccable timing and a good degree of power.

Guptill is agile and a ball of energy in the field as well. You would think he would be a major focus for the Indian Premier League T20 teams. Well he would be, if it weren’t for the fact that he has ruled himself out, prefering to play county cricket in England so he can focus on developing his skills for all forms of the game. Could I love this man any more?

Well actually, yes. If he can keep this form up for the remainder of the summer- especially in the Tests where New Zealand will be tested to the limit from the South African bowling line up that includes Dale Steyn not here for the T20s.

I have sometimes wondered about playing cricket late into March, but if that means getting opposition like the South Africans and then the summer of cricket can become the autumn of Guptill then I’m more than happy.

Filed under: sport

Does my democracy look big in this?

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 18th, 2012

Amidst the busy news week we have just had, full of the serious and the utterly silly, one story that did not get the attention it deserved was the testimony from the Chief Ombudsmen, Beverley Wakem at the Government Administration Select Committee.

The Office of the Ombudsmen is in “crisis”, says the Chief Ombudsman. Beverley Wakem says the public watchdog has a bulging backlog of cases because it lacks investigators, with underpaid staff leaving and in some cases literally being worked to death.

Saying this in such a public forum will not be something that the Chief Ombudsmen took lightly. Anyone who knows Beverley Wakem will know that it will not be grandstanding. This is a crisis- and it is one that really matters for all New Zealanders who care about the accountability of their government. Ms Wakem also told the Committee

The office, she said, was “sinking under the weight of the complaint burden. I’d say we are in crisis”. The public would suffer as a result from delays in handling complaints. “At the end of the day that isn’t acceptable. Justice delayed is justice denied and people are already distressed when they approach the office.”

And that is the nub of this. The Ombudsmen’s office plays a critical role in holding the government and its agencies to account. Its not just OIA requests, its also whistle-blowing on wrong-doing, conduct of insitutions that detain people such as prisons, refugee centres etc as well as our responsibilities under the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. They are essential to make our democracy function properly, whoever the government of the day is.

I have had numerous dealings with the Ombudsmen’s Office, and it is something that in the past you could simply not hide from. When I worked for Helen Clark we had a significant dispute over the release of material related to the so-called Corngate saga. The Ombudsmen’s Office was relentless in ensuring that the vast majority of the material was released. As an opposition politician I have taken a number of complaints to them. I have one that is still outstanding from May last year. We are anxious for them to take a look at the absurd deletions from the briefings to incoming Ministers this year. There are a number of cases relating to Christchurch pending as well.

This is not some backroom bureaucratic agency that can be shrunk in the name of public sector efficiency. The word Ombudsmen derives from a Norse word meaning representative. This is the agency that is the representative of the people charged with keeping government honest on all our behalf. It is an essential part of our democractic infrastructure, and the current government must finding funding to allow it to operate properly. At the moment they are starving it of funds, and that means they are not been hold to account to the degree they should be. If they do not move to resolve this crisis then they will lay themselves open to the accusation that this is a deliberate tactic to reduce their accountability.

At a time when the government is under scruitiny for its dodgy behaviour in being part of breaching electoral broadcasting law and for having the Prime Minister’s Electorate Chair on NZ on Air and involving himself in programming decisions this is a further black mark on their ability to play by the rules. This office must receive the support it needs- it is no exaggeration to say our democracy relies on it.