web analytics

Open mike 15/02/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 15th, 2025 - 62 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

62 comments on “Open mike 15/02/2025 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. thinker 1
    15 February 2025 at 7:54 am

    So here is the nub of Seymour's school lunch programme:

    We heard from Seymour: “Last year the programme was reformed to deliver the same outcomes while costing taxpayers less. This was achieved by embracing commercial expertise, using government buying power, and generating supply chain efficiencies to realise over $130m of annual cost savings, even more than anticipated in Budget 2024." (https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/new-school-lunch-programme-serves-first-healthy-lunches)

    We learned that the previous (expensive) lunches were halal-certified: "In a letter to the school community and seen by Stuff, Cornwell said their previous providers were required to have certification." (https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/02/14/more-scrutiny-for-school-lunches-talking-about-valuing-diversity/)

    Now, we hear from Seymour that: "However, to go to fully halal certified would require the massive expense of separate preparation facilities, packaging and distribution processes. I don't believe that expense would be justified," (https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/541915/school-lunch-provider-compass-admits-halal-meals-friendly-but-not-certified)

    Joining these dots…

    1. if Seymour's lunches were as diverse-friendly as the previous model they would be 'massively' more expensive.
    2. Ergo, Seymour has saved money by not adopting the religious dietary requirements of muslim and other religions.
    3. Seymour has said that's because he doesn't feel that is an expense that is justified.

    So, it's 'massively' not all about "embracing commercial expertise, using government buying power, and generating supply chain efficiencies", but by Seymour's own account a 'massive' part of the savings came from snubbing the religious requirements of (at least) the muslim community, which were a part of the previous service.

    I checked out the Human Rights Act 1993. In clause 21, it states: "For the purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are… (c) religious belief". I'm not a lawyer, and the law is a complex beast, but it feels right to me that saying that depriving people of the same access to public services on the basis of religion simply because the person who has the power to decide on access to those services doesn't see them as justified is discrimination in this country.

    Put another way, my thinking is that, if David Seymour happened to be or join the muslim faith, would he see the provision of halal-certified meals as 'not justified'?

    I'm still trying to work out whether this is dog-whistle politics to the 9-ish percent of New Zealanders who voted for him (assuming their votes mandated such discrimination, which I don't), or whether it's simply discrimination for its own sake.

    What do others think?

    • Mike the Lefty 1.1
      15 February 2025 at 8:56 am

      I think that Seymour probably thought that being halal certified simply wasn't worth the effort, seeing that he loathes the school lunch system and would gladly dump it tomorrow given a good excuse.

    • weka 1.2
      15 February 2025 at 9:28 am

      I think the primary drive is for power and libertarian policy.

      RW libertarians want freedom for themselves, and they're ok granting or depriving others freedom so long as they retain their own freedom. That freedom doesn't serve society.

      Now that ACT have serious power, and can see that globally there is a shift towards populism and authoritarianism, I think they are bolder than they were before and seeking to gain more power and control. But the fundamental drivers are the same.

      Maybe DS also doesn't like Muslims or Islam, for ideological and/or personal reasons (Islam/racism against Muslims). But those aren't necessary for him to be doing what he is doing. If he can gain power by marginalising Muslims, that servers the primary driver: power and ideology.

      The dog whistle also serves him, and the risk isn't his voters per se, it's the Nat/ACT swing voters, and the Nat voters who are being radicalised away from liberal values. Quite fast.

      We're not in the same situation as the US, but we are heading in that direction, and should be doing everything we can to avert that. That doesn't mean force, it means creating a new vision for NZ voters that will be more attractive than ACT's. Again, it's not ACT core vote that we need to be concerned with, it's the large number of NZers who are still liberal but have the potential to choose populism in the absence of a coherent progressive agenda.

      • Phillip ure 1.2.1
        15 February 2025 at 10:04 am

        Wot weka said..

      • Anne 1.2.2
        15 February 2025 at 10:09 am

        Spot on weka.

        Not much more left to say except his own narcissistic personality and his desire for personal power and control over and above the ideological dream, serves to make him far more dangerous than the majority of voters comprehend.

        • Obtrectator 1.2.2.1
          15 February 2025 at 4:48 pm

          Yep – the will to power. One of the most dangerous forces there is, especially since its exemplars began to realise you don't need superior force of arms to pursue it, not in the early stages at any rate. (You do later on, when the sheeple start to wake up.)

    • gsays 1.3
      15 February 2025 at 9:52 am

      Thanks thinker for laying it out so plainly. These thoughts gave been whirling round in my swede.

      It's another great example of these tories valuing a $ over people.

      Nicky No-Boats is another.

      I want to hear that Compass will be sacked and the local initiatives will be reinstated.

      The current school lunch contract (such that it is), is clearly not value for money if they aren't hallal certified and are providing a return to shareholders.

      Seymour and Act care more about foreign companies and their investors than local hungry children.

    • Incognito 1.4
      15 February 2025 at 10:10 am

      I think that David Seymour and his fellow travellers are neoliberal fascists to the core. All their rhetoric about equality, equal rights, and individual freedom, et cetera, hides their ultimate goal, which is to assimilate society into market and all people who live in and make up society from Homo sapiens to Homo economicus. Of course, they don’t want the state and taxpayers pay for any such thing as school lunches let alone provisions for special ‘identity’ groups.

      • Drowsy M. Kram 1.4.1
        15 February 2025 at 10:33 am

        yes Now convert Homo sapiens to Homo economicus even faster – with all new AI frown

        • Incognito 1.4.1.1
          15 February 2025 at 10:53 am

          Indeed! Have you noticed the sudden rise of influencers and ‘entrepreneurs’ trying to ‘help’ us on how to use AI to our best advance, personally and professionally? AI is the new toy-tool for individuals to get ahead and rise above the masses, to become smarter (!) and more self-reliant (and thus less dependent on outside control), work harder & smarter and become more effective, efficient, and productive and thus more valuable to employers and in/on the (employment) market.

          The next generation of kids will be absorbing this through osmosis and the new excuse ‘AI-ate-my-homework’ will be as lame as the old one – neoliberalism will be entrenched for another generation and the technocratic elite will hold all the strings. This is what David Seymour is trying to ram down our throats and some people think it’s a good thing!?

          https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/02/15/dark-questions-over-child-social-media-stars/

          • weka 1.4.1.1.1
            15 February 2025 at 11:37 am

            as an aside, Mike Joy said in a 2019 youtube that bitcoin was using so much power that it was taking up all the new solar generation (something like that). I'm trying to find out if that's still true, and if AI's large electricity demand is doing similar. The saving grace of it all seems more and more to be that eventually the whole stack of cards will collapse and people like Seymour will fall as well. A lot of suffering in the mean time.

            • Psycho Milt 1.4.1.1.1.1
              15 February 2025 at 5:05 pm

              I haven't seen any breakdowns of the numbers, but it's a no-brainer that the huge processing requirements of blockchain-based currencies require huge amounts of electricity to no useful purpose. AI will fall into the same category – processing potential answers billions of times to narrow things down to a 'plausible' one (not a 'correct' answer, just a 'plausible' one) doesn't strike me as a great justification for the cost of producing electricity either.

          • bwaghorn 1.4.1.1.2
            15 February 2025 at 1:26 pm

            When ai can drench and waigh 6000 lbs in 3 days and do my house work while I play golf I'll ne interested, till then mmmmeh

      • Drowsy M. Kram 1.4.2
        15 February 2025 at 10:47 am

        What has become of Homo politicus var. seymour in Aotearoa New Zealand?

        Homo politicus is characterised by an interest in justice, common welfare and the sustainability of the natural basis of life.

    • Psych Nurse 1.5
      15 February 2025 at 11:12 am

      You just know that more respect would be shown to those requiring Kosher food.

      • Psycho Milt 1.5.1
        15 February 2025 at 5:07 pm

        Would it? We don't know, because the people who'd require kosher food aren't berating the government for failing to spec a free service to their preferred standard.

    • Psycho Milt 1.6
      15 February 2025 at 4:59 pm

      NZ is a secular country. It's not "discrimination" to fail to customise a service because some religion has particular requirements of its followers. It's up to the followers of that religion to make their own arrangements if the default isn't good enough for them.

      It would be better if we went down the French path of making the secular nature of the state official, given the number of immigrants with foreign religions coming in. We have historical reasons why features of Christianity are embedded in our society, but let's not compound that error by embedding random other religions' features into it.

      • weka 1.6.1
        15 February 2025 at 7:49 pm

        the discrimination would be in access to education. If school meals are provided as a means of enabling student participation in education, then providing vegetarian meals but not halal meals might be considered discrimination. If the state can provide one of kind specialist meal, why not another? It's not so much a religious requirement, as a cultural one.

        If we say that parents of children who require halal or vegetarian meals must provide it themselves, how do we reconcile that with the point being to even out some of the issues around entrenched poverty? If all parents could/would provide good meals, there wouldn't be a need for school meals in the first place.

        • Psycho Milt 1.6.1.1
          15 February 2025 at 8:08 pm

          Where we differ may be that I'd also tell the vegetarians "No." If a kid has a peanut allergy, is coeliac, diabetic or whatever, that's one thing. If the parents favour a particular ideology, that's quite another and the state isn't obligated to pander to it. A child isn't prevented from becoming educated because the state won't accommodate their parents' religious requirements.

          • tWig 1.6.1.1.1
            15 February 2025 at 8:50 pm

            Oh, you're so generous.

          • weka 1.6.1.1.2
            15 February 2025 at 9:27 pm

            but it does mean that child faces barriers if they're vegetarian and their parents are useless. It's not hard to argue that being vegetarian is for health reasons, and then where do you draw the line? What if the child had never eaten meat at all? That's not only philosophy and ideology, it's physiology.

            • gsays 1.6.1.1.2.1
              16 February 2025 at 2:33 am

              Why not have the whole school eat together in a cafeteria style.

              Various dietary needs are far more readily accommodated, connections are strengthened, community is built, consciousness is raised when we break bread together.

              An occurrence that is all too rare in too many like lives.

            • Psycho Milt 1.6.1.1.2.2
              16 February 2025 at 6:22 am

              Exactly. If the service panders to particular preferences, where do you draw the line? Kosher food for Jews, no beef for Hindus, fish on Fridays for Catholics, no animal products for the vegans, low-carb for the paleo types, there's no end to it. Just say no.

              • weka …
                16 February 2025 at 9:27 am

                What's the normal diet then?

                • Psycho Milt …
                  16 February 2025 at 10:36 am

                  I assume the people who tender for this put a lot of thought into what can be provided cheaply and efficiently without being unfamiliar to local tastes. I wouldn't try and second-guess that.

                  Katherine Birbalsingh made school lunches at Michaela College in the UK vegetarian, on the basis it ruled out any religious arguments about who's not allowed to eat what animal. That sounds sensible to me, but I'm not sure NZ is ready for that across the whole school system – much easier to just tell religious people it's up to them whether they eat the lunches or not.

                  • weka …
                    16 February 2025 at 11:55 am

                    probably wouldn't be that hard to produce the main meals as vegan, and have side dishes for meat and dairy. Lots of people cater for various diets already. Imo, vegan is not suitable for most children, so you need the add ons. I'm going to guess that the number paleo kids is so small as to not be an issue.

                    • Phillip ure …
                      16 February 2025 at 4:41 pm

                      Yes…vegan with add on options would be the rational way to go…

                      And isn't processed meat used in school lunches a lot..?

                      And isn't that the meat the experts say is the most carcinogenic..?

                      Why are we continuing to feed children this poisonous crap…?…when we all know that it can cause cancer..?

                      I mean..w.t.f..!

                      And re vegan diets/suitability for children..?

                      Having been vegan for quite a long time…I can say that I have seen/know vegans of all ages….and they all seem to share rude/good health…

                      Make of that what you will..

                      But really..!..feeding a known carcinogen to children…?

                      Why are we still doing that…?..(when we know how bad it is..)
                      And why is that crap still allowed to be sold…?

  2. thinker 2
    15 February 2025 at 8:13 am

    As an addendum, I wonder what Luxon would say if faced with "Does the Prime Minister stand by the decision to remove halal-certification from school lunches on the basis that halal-certification is not justified"?

    • gsays 2.1
      15 February 2025 at 9:55 am

      Trick question.

      We all know he would answer 'What I can tell you is we are all working very hard to improve the economy…' or 'green shoots' or whatever the puppeteer wants him to say.

      • Mike the Lefty 2.1.1
        15 February 2025 at 10:25 am

        I would tell Mr Luxon that judging by his current performance it is HIS productivity, not the nation's, that is the real problem.

  3. PsyclingLeft.Always 3
    15 February 2025 at 8:43 am

    Ya gotta wonder….

    Backyard nurseries spreading pest plants in Southland

    Environment Southland has warned against backyard nurseries selling pest plants on social media.

    In the past three years the council has discovered individuals selling cotoneaster, buddleia and an invasive succulent known as pig's ear.

    A commercial nursery was also found selling a variety of a wilding pine.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/541782/backyard-nurseries-spreading-pest-plants-in-southland

    Put this up as some of these very invasive weeds are a real problem in NZ.

    Apart from Environment Southland etc…Who you gonna call? Look them up….

    https://www.weedbusters.org.nz/what-are-weeds/weed-list/darwins-barberry/

  4. weka 4
    15 February 2025 at 10:01 am

    a bit of crowdsourcing for a post. Can anyone find me the global figures on solar power generation as % of total power generation, by year? I've found the % increase in power generation, and % relative to other renewables, but can't find the % of total power by year.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 4.1
      15 February 2025 at 10:16 am

      Edit 2: This might be better – there’s a trend line/graph for ‘World’.

      https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-electricity-solar?tab=chart

      Hi weka – maybe this link, for electricity generation?

      https://www.statista.com/statistics/1302055/global-solar-energy-share-electricity-mix/

      And this is a "Share of [total] electricity production from solar" by country.

      https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-electricity-solar?tab=table

      The Cook Islands tops the table, at 50%. Australia is in 11th place (17%), and NZ trails a little with 0.47%.

      Edit: When I tried accessing the statista link a second time, it wanted a login, but the first tme the page loaded OK – the right-most bar is for 2023; 5.5%

      • weka 4.1.1
        15 February 2025 at 11:20 am

        thanks! I also can't access the Statista pages now. Our world in data is good though.

        What I'm trying to get to is how much renewables are keeping up with or ahead of demand. eg if we increase solar by x amount, is that then used up by increases in demand.

        • gsays 4.1.1.1
          15 February 2025 at 12:05 pm

          It would be profoundly ironic if AI came up with an attractive (vote winning) path to society powering down/living a less carbon dense lifestyle.

          • weka 4.1.1.1.1
            15 February 2025 at 1:07 pm

            I'm sure someone can ask one of the various AIs how to do it 😉

          • Incognito 4.1.1.1.2
            15 February 2025 at 1:49 pm

            Every technological development and evolution have helped us (humans) to move our boundaries and expand our horizons, first it was physically and now also digitally. We can go further and faster than ever before. But physical space & time haven’t changed, nor the Laws of Physics (many of which are power laws, e.g., kinetic energy), and everything comes at an increased cost of energy.

            Space exploration, planetary exploitation (incl. the moon), and all that stuff (not the junk) in orbit around our planet required enormous inputs in energy.

            Why would AI be an exception in the history of humankind? Have you ever noticed how electronic devices and chargers get warm/hot? Imagine a whole building floor filled with electronic big beasts grunting away so that you can get a half-decent answer (on a good day) out of ChatGPT – one of the weak spots of data centres is efficient cooling facilities. [Disclaimer: I’m way out of my comfort zone with this, but didn’t use AI as such 🙂 ]

            https://datacenters.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Azure_Modern-Datacenter-Cooling_Infographic.pdf

            • Obtrectator 4.1.1.1.2.1
              15 February 2025 at 4:55 pm

              Imagine a whole building floor filled with electronic big beasts grunting away

              Not a new problem. I can remember when mainframe computers had to be housed in climate-controlled rooms which you had to enter and leave via something in the nature of an airlock.

              • Anne …
                15 February 2025 at 8:29 pm

                I can remember that too. The "computer" was as high as a normal ceiling and the width the length of a normal sized lounge. Lights flashed on and off and odd noises were emitted even when not in use. Us plebs – that is members of the staff deemed to be at the bottom of the heap which was most of us – were not allowed near it for a long time. That suited me. It looked like some alien machine from outer space.

      • Bearded Git 4.1.2
        16 February 2025 at 12:02 am

        Scandalous that the percentage of solar in Oz is 35 times that in NZ.

        WTF have the various governments been doing here? It's as if they haven't realised the sun shines here and that the rest of the world is installing solar rapidly.

        As I said yesterday Labour should set up a state owned solar power company…..private companies around the world are making profits on solar so such an entity would rapidly become profitable.

        • gsays 4.1.2.1
          16 February 2025 at 2:37 am

          Amen brother, that's how to make MOW 2.0 self funding.

        • Graeme 4.1.2.2
          16 February 2025 at 7:51 am

          Labour should set up a state owned solar power company

          That's what Onslow would have been, and attacking the worst of the gentailers' profiteering. Why National killed it as quickly as they could.

          3/4 of our power companies are 51% state owned, but subject to the discipline of the Companies Act, so have to operate with a profit motive. So the state has a vested interest in the current setup.

          The issue with solar in Aotearoa compared to Australia is at a distribution level. Australia has mandated bi-directional networking, whereas our lines companies go out of their way to obstruct small generators, solar and hydro.

  5. dpalenski 5
    15 February 2025 at 12:21 pm

    System Crash podcast does an episode on Silicon Valley entering it's imperial era between Musk take over of the government, JD Vance wanting American "AI" to dominate.

    https://open.spotify.com/episode/2Rl5DgXYKRHtjkbt8tViKY?si=2f60ffcedc3d4a47

    Until we have a popular alternative to Neoliberalism, the system will continue to crash

    • Incognito 5.1
      15 February 2025 at 1:01 pm

      Until we have a popular alternative to Neoliberalism, the system will continue to crash

      Until then we don’t need more neoliberalism-on-steroids. Or re-packaged/re-branded neoliberalism with the ‘dust bag’ cleaned out and the filters cleared for more of the same. [FFS, how much do we (!) pay this glorified over-qualified vacuum-cleaner salesman?]

      https://thekaka.substack.com/p/rennie-roche-and-willis-want-faster

      • dpalenski 5.1.1
        15 February 2025 at 2:44 pm

        I don't know if I should laugh or cry that some commenters in that kaka post are shocked that the agents of change aren't going to be in the public service and that shock horror they will uphold Neoliberalism.

        • Incognito 5.1.1.1
          15 February 2025 at 3:56 pm

          I agree, the incongruence was a little surprising.

          The public service is between a rock and a hard place, stuck between politicians and the public. The conflict of interest is more of the making of politicians, in my opinion, and the Coalition is not a friend of and on the same team as the public service. This begs the question why our democratically elected representatives are flogging the public service to death and throwing the left-overs into Hunger Games.

          • dpalenski 5.1.1.1.1
            15 February 2025 at 5:00 pm

            Right wing politicians like most bullies pick on people who can't fight back. Public servants can't fight back. But yeah you have to believe right wing talking points that the public service is bastion of left wing thought. Neolib and socially processive yes so not completely aligned with the CoC. With supporting politicians some heads of departments can do great things, but you need those politicians.

            • Incognito 5.1.1.1.1.1
              15 February 2025 at 8:50 pm

              A big part of the problem is mission-creep (for want of a better word) and confusion about boundaries and responsibilities. Politicians stray too often into management and operational issues and there’s too much political interference. The Public Sector has too many stakeholders & masters.

              Brian Roche made some comments in his speech about this but he removed crucial context and singled out the Public Sector and made some vague references to ‘the market’.

              As a result of where we are, I think there is too much focus on management in the Public Service and not enough focus on leadership. They are very different concepts.

              What does leadership look like in a modern public management system, and what are the attributes of leadership that we need to have in a rapidly changing environment?

              […]

              Change and innovation are forever. This is very much at the heart of private sector service businesses, so why would it be different for the public sector? We need to be repositioning and reinventing all the time. We need pragmatic, data-driven policy solutions in real time. I believe it's a way of thinking. It's an attitude. And it's the essence of leadership in what I believe to be a contemporary environment.

              https://www.publicservice.govt.nz/news/sir-brian-roche-on-re-orientating-the-public-service

              I’m quite sure that Roche’s words and actions are closely watched and scrutinised by Nicola Willis for alignment with her ideological agenda. This is where friction might occur between Roche and Government policy in future.

            • tWig 5.1.1.1.1.2
              15 February 2025 at 8:53 pm

              I am sure there is a flock of turkeys in the Public Service who voted for Christmas. Those of us caught in the 90s learnt our lesson then. False smiles and sinking lids and salary increases that meant you worked for less dosh each year.

      • Shanreagh 5.1.2
        15 February 2025 at 6:34 pm

        I think Brian Roche's analogy about vaccuum cleaners, dust bags as it relates to the Public Service is one of the most heartless and generally horrible one I have heard for many a year.

        Revolting

        These are people generally doing the best job they know how to, unable to fight back. They deserve better. I worked with Brian Roche a couple of times over the years and he had a reputation of being one of the better ones, back in the day. He has clearly gone on a different path since then.

        What an absolute shame.

        • Obtrectator 5.1.2.1
          15 February 2025 at 6:46 pm

          Senior public servants can pivot on a dime when they see which way the wind is blowing. I well remember what enthusiastic early adopters some of them were when the neolib revolution really began to bite, after the 4LG won its second term. Three jobs in a row disappeared from under me during the reorganisations. For a time the private sector was actually a more benign environment, until it too caught the virus.

        • Incognito 5.1.2.2
          15 February 2025 at 8:27 pm

          I think the analogy was extremely ill-thought but it came up in the Q&A after his speech and there was no hint of this in the speech itself. However, in his analogy, public servants that he thinks highly of are the dust particles that fill up the dust bag and clog up the filters.

          My feeling is that Roche is way too far removed from the people and public servants at the coalface. His inner and immediate circle is too high up the hierarchy and the 46 (!) chief executives.

          All 46 chief executives are employed by me and report to me.

          https://www.publicservice.govt.nz/news/sir-brian-roche-on-re-orientating-the-public-service

          Still, Roche is an old neoliberal dog and he’s not going to change his spots or learn new tricks. He’s stooped in market ideas and market speak.

          It sounds obvious, but we need to increasingly adopt an external, market focus that puts the citizens we serve at the centre.

          […]

          The market is changing and the machine isn't responding.

          […]

          I'm really interested in how we proxy some market disciplines and demonstrate value for money.

          He’s not going to implement major restructuring or transformation of the Pubic Service.

          We need to reorientate the Public Service and I'm feeling both intimidated and exhilarated by that challenge. And when I think about this, I'm not looking at rebooting from scratch – I see it more as adjusting our current models and aligning them and streamlining them.

          Spare a thought for all the hard-working public servants who’ve already lost their jobs and the ones who will be ‘streamlined’ out of a job in the near future – they’re just dust particles.

  6. Shanreagh 6
    15 February 2025 at 10:42 pm

    It sounds obvious, but we need to increasingly adopt an external, market focus that puts the citizens we serve at the centre.

    […]

    Quoted from Brian Roche by Incognito 5.1.2.2

    This is just rubbish. Any 'public at the centre' went west from 1987 on. With the reframing under the various acts in the 80s & 90s the Public Service focus was moved from the public or citizens to working for Ministers. This was explicit in some of the KPIs/CE contracts etc that were entered into.

    So unless the Minister sees putting citizens at the centre as important this won't happen. Most/many ministers are focussed on their portfolios and many of these portfolios actually now (see above) don't have a strong public focus. Service department such as Customs do, Health should, Education should DoC does…….

    Then there is the definitional morass of which citizens, where is the centre?

    Troubling.

    Par for course and been there/done that. When I left on early retirement a colleague with about 4 years less service than me had notched up 17 restructurings, realignments, citizens at the centre & not in 30 years. Colossal waste of money and brains.

    Ministers are always fiddling.

    The management studies that were around when I studied were big on being a failure if you suddenly found you needed to restructure, meaning you had taken your eye off the ball and the chance to ease change through/in.

    Leaders and good managers were not being given the chance. Although Labour brought in the neo-lib stuff in the late 1980s they were better 'overseers' later,in the 2000s, in my view, than this silly private/public who does it better stuff of the Nats/ACT, (and Roche??)

    • Incognito 6.1
      16 February 2025 at 11:31 am

      Well, it’s ‘obvious’ to Roche and the majority of the audience he was preaching to, according to Bernard Hickey – the groupthink is strong with this crowd. Come to think of it, it’s not surprising considering that Roche is and has been a highly paid consultant who’s been hand-picked by the neo-authoritarian Coalition to deliver a market-style ‘solution’ for the Public Sector and beat them back into shape and ‘core business’ without raising too much attention by labelling it ‘restructure’ or, Heaven forbids, ‘transformation’ – resorting to innocuous analogies for ‘cleaning out the vacuum cleaner’ hides the fact that the Coalition will cherry-pick any recommendations as an open-invite to make further and deeper cuts. And as you say, it’s yet another one in a long series and history of the Public Service.