Keeping it in the Family Commission

Written By: - Date published: 2:06 pm, July 16th, 2013 - 85 comments
Categories: accountability, national, twitter - Tags: ,

nepotism

Title ht – further puns encouraged…

85 comments on “Keeping it in the Family Commission ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tom Gould 1
    16 July 2013 at 2:18 pm

    Just Tories being Tories. Nothing to see here. MSM not interested. Unless this is a rumour?

    • lprent 1.1
      16 July 2013 at 2:31 pm

      Don’t think that Jacinda would repeat a rumour. Besides it fits the profile of jobs for mates philosophy that the right specialises in.

    • AmaKiwi 1.2
      16 July 2013 at 2:45 pm

      “Just Tories being Tories.”

      No. There is no oversight, no public scrutiny, no requirement for qualifications.

      A US presidential appointee requires “Senate confirmation.” That means public hearings are held and the candidate is grilled before the media. Then the whole Senate must approve the nominee.

      Since our version of the “president” and the “senate” are one and the same, we should require two-thirds of parliament approve every nominee. (It would have to be constitutionally enshrined.)

      This dictatorial corruption must end! Our governing system needs major repairs.

    • DavidC 1.3
      23 July 2013 at 6:18 pm

      No that is just Labour MPs being hypocrites….

      http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2013/07/labour-using-the-hipkins-standard-again-they-should-look-at-their-own-history/

      I really love Helen Kelly appointed to growth and innovation…LOL 🙂

  2. McFlock 2
    16 July 2013 at 2:37 pm

    😆 😥 😆 😥 😆 😥 😆 😥

    Can’t choose which…

  3. karol 3
    16 July 2013 at 2:53 pm

    Also reported by Yahoo News.

    • karol 3.1
      16 July 2013 at 3:02 pm

      And the appointment of Parata’s husband was reported by 3 News on 14 May 2013:

      Two new members have been appointed to the Families Commission board, just days after it was announced outgoing board member Christine Rankin now helms the Conservative Party.
      Te Papa boss Sir Wira Gardiner, who is the husband of Education Minister Hekia Parata and has previously headed the Waitangi Tribunal and Tertiary Education Commission, and former Families Commission reference group member Parmjeet Parmar will fill two vacancies on the board.

      I see Amy Adams sister is Brenda Miles, “a former adviser to Social Development Minister Paula Bennett.”

  4. Santi 4
    16 July 2013 at 3:34 pm

    A shocker: National Party nepotism.

  5. Tom 5
    16 July 2013 at 4:05 pm

    Dear Jacinta,

    I am trying very hard not to be a conspiracy theorist on this issue, but you are making it difficult for me to do so.

    Would it be possible to publish a social network diagram of this cohort in this forum ?

    Regards,

    Tom.

  6. Brett Dale 6
    16 July 2013 at 5:47 pm

    You could find any links to any political party, this happens across the board, left or right.

  7. Rosetinted 7
    16 July 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Isn’t Hekia Parata Lady Gardiner? Which would make Wira Gardiner the husband I think, who was a high executive in the Department of Maori Affairs. It does seem that some recognisable political surnames crop up when one hears of top jobs in govt or the periphery. Surprised that Margaret Bazley wasn’t in the mix, she would soon sort these families out. Or Paula Gridlock she’d stop them in their tracks!

  8. Yes 8
    16 July 2013 at 6:13 pm

    ok so what is the difference of being given a list MP position Jacinda?

    • McFlock 8.1
      16 July 2013 at 6:23 pm

      don’t be shy, Yes: are you making a suggestion of nepotism in the Labour list selection process? Do tell us that you actually have a point, please…

    • Anne 8.2
      16 July 2013 at 6:26 pm

      …what is the difference of being given a list MP position Jacinda?

      What the hell has that got to do with the Family Commission appointments.

      Not feeling tolerant towards nepotistic (if there isn’t such a word I’ve just invented it) conduct and right wing mentally challenged twerps.

  9. Yes 9
    16 July 2013 at 6:38 pm

    List MP’s are appointed with negotiation aren’t they? All parties I am talking about. Nepotism – will there are plenty of family connections in appointments by all parties.

    What about Helen Clark’s husband – should have he stood down from all government roles?

    • Anne 9.1
      16 July 2013 at 6:47 pm

      What about Helen Clark’s husband – should have he stood down from all government roles?

      What government roles twerp? Before retirement (whatever) he was the head of the Auckland Medical School, Sociology Dept. It was NOT a government appointment. He was selected on merit by senior members of the medical profession. Sociology was his professional career you ignorant ass.

    • McFlock 9.2
      16 July 2013 at 6:54 pm

      All appointments are made by decision-makers.
      The decision-makers need to follow a clearly impartial process to avoid accusations of nepotism and cronyism. They have a duty to serve their organisation’s “interests” by hiring the most competent people.

      However, they might have a personal “interest” in a spouse, relative or long-term friend gaining employment. Or their supervisors might have a similar interest, and apply pressure. This might be at odds with their obligation to serve the organisation’s “interests”.

      This is called a “conflict of interest”. The party with the conflict needs to withdraw from the decision-making process to avoid even the appearance of the conflict tainting the selection process.

      For some reason, as soon as national took power all the best candidates for government-appointed positions seem to be cronies, spouses or relatives of ministers. One of life’s mysteries – unless conflicts of interest aren’t being managed.

      lol
      Suddenly realised I’m trying to explain ethical practises to a tory. “and some landed upon stony ground”…

      • Yes 9.2.1
        16 July 2013 at 7:05 pm

        lol – well explained but I understand – just drawing a parrallel between List MP appointments (I did say all parties)

        • weka 9.2.1.1
          16 July 2013 at 7:40 pm

          The GP list is selected by the membership (for the most part).

        • McFlock 9.2.1.2
          16 July 2013 at 7:54 pm

          So do you have an instance of a conflict of interest in the list selections of any party?
          Or is the parallel you’ve drawn an imaginary line?

          • Yes 9.2.1.2.1
            16 July 2013 at 8:10 pm

            1. Stuart Nash. In the 2011 general election, Nash lost his place in Parliament after losing the seat of Napier to National candidate Chris Tremain. At position 27 on the Labour Party list, Nash was not ranked high enough to return to Parliament as a List MP.[5]

            After leaving Parliament, Nash signed on as the chief-of-staff for newly-appointed party leader David Shearer. However, Nash resigned after just 2 months into the job and returned to his home town of Napier, citing the birth of his new child and focusing on winning back the Napier electorate. – plus related to Walter Nash.

            2. Our Friend Jacinda – After graduating from Waikato University, she spent time working in the office of Phil Goff, and of Helen Clark as a researcher.

            3.What about Carol Beaumont – now doesnt the unions have 20% leadership vote NOW
            In May 2003 Beaumont was elected Secretary of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions.[4] This followed 20 years involvement in the union movement

            4. Another List MP based on Union connections
            Andrew Little – After graduating he took a job as a lawyer with the Engineers’ Union (a forerunner of the EPMU). In 1997 he was appointed the union’s general counsel (chief lawyer). Two years later, he was appointed assistant national secretary, and was elected national secretary when Rex Jones stood down from the position in 2000.

            5. And what about this bloke?
            Robertson returned to New Zealand during the first term of the Fifth Labour Government to work as a Ministerial advisor to Minister for the Environment Marian Hobbs and later Prime Minister Helen Clark. During his time in Clark’s office, Robertson was rumoured to have the nickname “H3” during the 2005 General Election (H1 being Clark, and H2 being Chief of Staff, Heather Simpson).[4]

            After the 2005 Election, Robertson left the Prime Minister’s office to work as the Senior Research Marketing Manager for the University of Otago based at the Wellington School of Medicine.[5]

            Good to see no inside knowledge on LIST MP RANKINGS

            • McFlock 9.2.1.2.1.1
              16 July 2013 at 8:23 pm

              None of those are nepotism.

              Are you seriously having difficulty understanding the difference between (at worst) promotions based on previous experience and competence in an industry or organisation, and jobs given to family and spouses? There is no comparison between the two.

              • Yes …
                16 July 2013 at 8:40 pm

                will I guess if JA is so dam concerned about the appointment why doesn’t she call for an enquiry – I mean its the opposition MO.

                However always a pleasure to debate with you McFlock..off to bed

            • Stuart Nash 9.2.1.2.1.2
              17 July 2013 at 11:32 pm

              Just a factual correction: In 2011, I did not “lose the seat of Napier to National candidate Chris Tremain”. In fact I reduced Tremain’s 9,200 majority to 3,400: the largest swing against a sitting Nat MP in the country. Get your facts right please.

            • Frank Macskasy 9.2.1.2.1.3
              22 July 2013 at 8:18 pm

              @ Yes… if that is the best you can do – then epic fail.

              For example, the University of Otago is not a government body. It is a preivate instution that hires whomever it damn well pleases.

              Like I said: you’ve failed to prove your point.

              F Minus

        • rob 9.2.1.3
          16 July 2013 at 9:14 pm

          List MP’s yes the Joyce creature is one isn’t it
          Prob explains the Tory psyche!

  10. Yes 10
    16 July 2013 at 7:00 pm

    From Bebo

    I’m currently the Director of the Social Statistics Research Group and Professor of Sociology at the University, with part-time appointments in the School of Population Health and the Department of Statistics,

    • wtl 10.1
      16 July 2013 at 7:10 pm

      As Anne said, Peter Davis was appointed to those roles through the proper university process. You do realize that they are all university positions, right?

      In any case, “they did it too” is just a lame argument against something like this.

      • Yes 10.1.1
        16 July 2013 at 7:17 pm

        has anyone asked if the other 90 were poor candidates? Maybe if all the 90 plus candidates were named and cv presented then we can judge the value of the tweet.

        Other than that it is just a machine gun approach by J – isnt it? 3 – Zip on the no complaint being upheld for further enquiry by police etc on the GSCB leak…this is the MO of the opposition – spray and walk away.

        • wtl 10.1.1.1
          16 July 2013 at 7:23 pm

          Surely in a case of apparent nepotism it is the prerogative of those doing the appointment to show that the appointment followed the proper process (i.e. the best person was selected and there was no conflict of interest), not the other way around?

          • Yes 10.1.1.1.1
            16 July 2013 at 7:27 pm

            what was the standard of the other 90 who applied? Answer that then I will agree with you.

            Other than this tweet is 100% speculation by someone who uses connections to get a list ranking and subsequently appointed as the “best person for the job”.

            If Jacinda thinks there were better applicants why doesnt she name names.

            • McFlock 10.1.1.1.1.1
              16 July 2013 at 7:58 pm

              someone who uses connections to get a list ranking and subsequently appointed as the “best person for the job”

              [citation needed]

      • Anne 10.1.2
        16 July 2013 at 7:17 pm

        For the lickle spittle Yes:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Davis_%28sociologist%29

        He has previously served on the Auckland Area Health Board, and was a representative in 1989 when his wife (Health Minister at the time) suspended that body.

        • Yes 10.1.2.1
          16 July 2013 at 7:23 pm

          so? – Bebo is better as he writes it himself.

          Wikipedia – well University of Auckland says no to references there in students work…so supporting a professor using a refrence his employer doesn’t support – hmmm I never abused you with spittle little talk – so why do you do it to me?

          Anyway I am sure he is an excellent person

  11. Cactus Kate 11
    16 July 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Belinda Milnes worked in Paula Bennett’s office and during the entire period Bennett wiped the floor with Ardern.

    Milnes v Ardern? Belinda could have a head cold and come off four days in hospital and still annihilate her on any debate over welfare or her job here as Families Commissioner. It is pretty clear that none of those criticizing this as a crony appointment have actually met Milnes before.

    • Yes 11.1
      16 July 2013 at 7:47 pm

      Hi Cactus – heard about you – so you supporting me or calling me a wingnut too?

      • Lanthanide 11.1.1
        16 July 2013 at 9:26 pm

        I don’t think it’d be wise for anyone to support you, given the complete lack of intelligence that you routinely display.

  12. AmaKiwi 12
    16 July 2013 at 8:36 pm

    This conversation got highjacked by a right wing asshole . . . again.

    The Tories are trying to destroy government organizations they don’t like by appointing unqualified friends and relatives.

    That’s the issue.

    • Yes 12.1
      16 July 2013 at 8:43 pm

      I’m not an as..le – why do people abuse people on here? Why are they unqualified…I mean last week you were beating Garner up on sending out a tweet on leadership and now you are defending an equally unjustified tweet on an issue no one has seen the other 90 plus applicants CV’s.

      Just providing balance

      • Arfamo 12.1.1
        16 July 2013 at 8:48 pm

        You really don’t seem to understand even the concept of completely unrelated issues.

      • Anne 12.1.2
        16 July 2013 at 8:48 pm

        I’m not an as..le – why do people abuse people on here?

        You’re being called an asshole because you are behaving like an asshole. Note, Yes, the word is asshole not arsehole. There is a difference in the meaning. Got it?

      • wtl 12.1.3
        16 July 2013 at 9:16 pm

        Are you seriously suggesting that we should be shown the other 90+ applicants’ CVs? You do know that there are privacy issues involved, right?

        Anyway, I’m guessing someone (Ardern herself? I/S?) will do an OIA request to get to the bottom of these appointments and find out if the proper process was involved. Going by past appointments, I wouldn’t be surprised if they are dodgy as heck.

        edit: If you were really determined to provide ‘balance’ you would do the OIA requests yourself and find out.

        • Yes 12.1.3.1
          16 July 2013 at 9:28 pm

          No need for OIA as happy right appointments made

          • wtl 12.1.3.1.1
            16 July 2013 at 9:33 pm

            So you have no evidence that the proper process was followed. You aren’t interested in getting any despite National’s previous record on such things. And then you complain the Ardern is wrong to highlight this case, despite it having the appearance of being nepotism?

            • Yes 12.1.3.1.1.1
              16 July 2013 at 9:42 pm

              Get her to list the other 90 candidates so the public can judge and not rely on a tweet that corruption is at work. If she is such a brilliant leader tell her to call the police!!!!!

              • wtl …
                16 July 2013 at 9:56 pm

                1. That’s the same thing you’ve said over and over again. I heard you the first time. If you have nothing new to add, why bother replying?
                2. As I implied, she is probably sending an OIA request to get to bottom of this, so we’ll probably hear more about this than one tweet.
                3. I don’t know what she is supposed to be the leader of and why you think she should call the police. She is suggesting that the appointments are dodgy and reek of nepotism, not that they are illegal.

                Ok, that’s it for me about this. Reply if you are one of those people that must have the last word. But I couldn’t care less.

                • Yes …
                  16 July 2013 at 9:59 pm

                  These appointments were made and posted six months ago..it’s been in the public domain for so long….can’t believe this Jacinda is talking about it now. Too long looking in the mirror. No wonder she can’t get a blow on Paula Bennett. Lazy

              • McFlock …
                16 July 2013 at 10:06 pm

                It’s up to the government to demonstrate that the successful candidates were each in the top 2.2% of all the applicants. Part of the way they reassure the citizenry of this is to have demonstrably clear hiring practises. Public confidence in government appointments requires avoiding even the appearance of impropriety. Not just be clean, but be seen to be clean.

                However, with this bunch what we find are ministers calling school friends and forgetting how they got the number, with ministerial spouses and relatives getting sinecures.

                I’m really not surprised that you fail to understand the problem. It involves ethics, and you’re a tory.

                • Yes …
                  16 July 2013 at 10:09 pm

                  You are calling corruption…fine understand..get Jacinda to call the police..what is wrong with her doing that?

                  • McFlock …
                    16 July 2013 at 10:14 pm

                    No, I’m calling the appearance of corruption and irregular hiring practises. There is a difference.

      • Psycho Milt 12.1.4
        17 July 2013 at 6:38 am

        Just providing balance

        Balance? Well yes, there seems otherwise to be a shortage of trolling imbeciles on the thread, but a shortage of those is generally regarded as a good thing.

        If you don’t want to attract terms like troll, asshole or imbecile, go and look up the meaning of the word nepotism, then have a think about how it might apply in terms of government appointments. Once you’ve got that sorted, have a look back through your attempts here to “balance” the post’s examples of nepotism in government appointments with examples of non-family-members appointed to party list positions and a family member not appointed to any government position, and cringe at the brain-hurting stupidity thus demonstrated.

        • BrucetheMoose 12.1.4.1
          17 July 2013 at 10:28 pm

          So you are saying instead of using the term nepotism, should we be using jobs for the rellies then? Just wondering.

    • Paul 12.2
      16 July 2013 at 10:35 pm

      That’s why they troll on this site.

  13. Puddleglum 13
    16 July 2013 at 10:41 pm

    Here’s a perspective piece by Rawiri Taonui on the schools closures and reforms which notes the interesting number of the Parata clan involved:

    “Five of the six trustees of the Noku te Ao Early Childhood Education Centre leading the Te Pa o Rakaihautu school proposal are Ngai Tahu, including chairwoman Rangimarie Parata and Reihana Parata, both relations of the minister and deputy director. Submitted in April 2011 and endorsed by the ministry in November 2011 when Apryll Parata was Maori education deputy secretary, processes around the proposal raise several questions.”

    “The ministry has withheld the names of a 14-member establishment board, claiming it was not “in the public interest” to know. But with much at stake and with at least five people from one whanau connected to the proposal, including the minister, deputy director and several of the proposers, transparency would seem paramount.”

    You might also want to email Parata’s office to get a response from yet another Parata (in fact, both her electorate and Parliamentary offices have secretarial assistance from individuals with the surname ‘Parata’).

  14. Descendant Of Sssmith 14
    16 July 2013 at 10:49 pm

    Firstly list MP’s are political appointments it’s a political process. How much members get a say depends on the particular parties political process.

    To compare the selection of appointments to public service positions is apples and oranges.

    Secondly appointments to the public service are supposed to be free of political interference. It’s why the SSC was set up in the first place to stop governments hiring and firing at a whim or change of government and filling up the public service with cronies.

    Appointments to boards follow these guidelines and are sort of inbetween the two ends above:

    http://www.ssc.govt.nz/sites/all/files/BAIG-August%202012_0.pdf

    Clearly there is a political aspect to the appointments but equally good process needs to be followed before appointing.

    I’m not sure that good process is always being followed from my general observation – Law Commission appointments seemed poor and there does seem to be less neutrality of appointment with this govt than previously – maybe it’s just more noticeable.

    We’ve seen it in budget processes as well with funding tootled off to PEDA and Family First both of whom had connections within the party.

    I suspect if you put 9 years of the last Labour Government’s perceived crony appointments alongside Nationals Nationals would be way longer and already exceeding 9 years worth.

    Some I guess would say that they, National, are more efficient at putting people who support their policies in pace.

    I’d rather the guidelines were followed much more closely and with less Ministerial interference.

    In these roles however it does seem they can do this.

  15. richard 15
    17 July 2013 at 7:41 am

    Related post on the Nats’ cronyism is this one by Frank Macskasy on TDB

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/04/05/crony-watch/

  16. geoff 16
    17 July 2013 at 2:32 pm

    Also, Bill English gave one of his useless fuckwit brothers a job in the MOH as some kind of advisor.

    That family must be one of the worst offenders for bludging off the government in the entire country.

    Instead of drawing polynesians ripping off the system, Al Nisbet should have drawn the English family instead.

    And English has the gall to bail up Robert Wade!!? No shame, no principles. He’s just a hands-in-the-till thief. Fucking sickening.

  17. BrucetheMoose 17
    17 July 2013 at 10:19 pm

    Hey, one of my grandparents was a Parata. Anybody got Hekia’s phone number, I think I will give her a call? It’s always interesting catching up with long lost relatives.

  18. Yes 18
    23 July 2013 at 5:25 pm

    [deleted]

    [lprent: Banned for two weeks. One week for copy-paste without even a link to the source. Another week for making me google it.

    Link to it, do shortish quotes from it, and explain why people should follow the link. And read the policy. ]

Links to post