Comments on: The leak they are not investigating

By: Will another Minister have to go? « Red Alert

Will another Minister have to go? « Red Alert — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:59:12 +0000

[...] Grant has done a good post on the SST budget leak. [...]

By: Tracey

Tracey — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:49:45 +0000

Darren

I posted about P Bennet and PC on the other thread.

Interesting Herald editorial on the Leak. Hits the nail on the head. Perhaps the tide is turning and some media have finally seen the smirk which masquerades as a smile?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10633188

By: n0exit

n0exit — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:19:32 +0000

The govt. should not be hiding the development of policy or any information that the govt. has. There are only a few exceptions to this (national securtiy, stock market implications etc.) the mining and the state sector leaks don’t fall into the exceptions category and therefore it should have been public information anyway. Good on the leakers I say. What’s there to hide?? They are voted in to develope policy, I want to see what information they use to develope it…

By: Darren

Darren — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:06:39 +0000

What happened with the investigation into Paula Bennetts ‘leaking’ of the beneficiaries details?

By: TopCat

TopCat — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:53:59 +0000

The way to stop leaks is to release the information early on. The longer you hold onto information or the more indecisive you are the more opportunity you give your opponents.

By: Ianmac

Ianmac — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:52:34 +0000

I missed the early parts of the Leak story but didn’t one of the interviewees comment on the information came from the “Minister” I thought meaning Tony Ryall? Wish my memory was better but….

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:32:50 +0000

And then there is a question again of who is the person doing all the leaking

That’s what I was thinking Rebecca. The numbers of public servants that would know this information, when a document like this is prepared for ministers at this level, is actually very small. It would take no time to list their names and have a word with them. At that level, these are people with a great deal to lose if discovered; at the very least they would lose their careers.

Now if a minister leaks information, suspicion on public servants serve both the minister (diverts blame from their office) and the government (no government wants to look divided). It also means if an inquiry finds no culprit – the matter is generally forgotten.

By: Tracey

Tracey — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:05:22 +0000

Funny then that this Government doesnt support Whistleblower legislation. I dont know Labour’s stanc eon it. BUT this kind of legislation enables leaks in the public interest with job security… as far as you can with all the skullduggery about.

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:46:06 +0000

And then there is a question again of who is the person doing all the leaking – I too, now that I think about it, very much doubt it is anyone in the public sector and as for the government, well I doubt it’s Bill English as this particularly leak and then the news stories reported today don’t exactly put him in a favourable light. Whoever is doing it is trying to score points and elevate their own status otherwise, why bother?

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:42:46 +0000

Yes so in that case it will very much be cuts for the few and not the many while the many suffer the effects of GST. All I want is someone to have the balls to recognise that families on $70-100k are not rich. That’s all (oh and make the tax & acc systems fairer etc etc etc).