Regular readers of Keeping Stock (whose numbers seem to be growing if the Alexa stats I've been directed to are correct) will be aware that I have few kind words for Helen Clark. And so, with the announcement tonight that she has asked the Auditor-General to investigate the scandals within the Immigration Service, I'm not sure whether to view her with grudging admiration or disdain. Anyway, here's the Herald story:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10511163
Part of me wants to say "Well done Helen" for acting quickly on this. She only arrived back in the country over the weekend, and she has certainly acted decisively. The Auditor-General will have wide powers, and will set his own terms of reference. It is sure to be a comprehensive enquiry.
But here's where my attennae start to twitch. Once an inquiry is underway, the matter will effectively disappear from the public domain. Opposition members will be limited in what questions they can ask, and Ministers, and indeed the Prime Minister, will have a ready-made excuse for obfuscation - "I can't comment on that. All will be revealed when the Auditor-General completes his inquiry." - so there is little political capital for the opposition parties to use. And as the cheese ad says, "Good things take time" - I'm sure that it will be a stretch for the A-G to conduct and complete an inquiry then report back to government prior to the election.
Helen Clark is the consummate politician. She admits to being "blindsided" by this rapidly spreading cancer. However in a quote in the Herald article, she seems to be trying to innoculate her Immigration Ministers, both current and former from fallout when she says:
""We feel we have been constantly blindsided by events and developments," she said.
"It's fair to say that the confidence of the Cabinet has been somewhat shattered. There are things that obviously never came to our attention.""
I don't buy that. So on the basis of probability, I believe that Clark's decision today to call in the Auditor-General is more about political expediency that it is about good governance. And I'm probably not alone when I recall the Ingram inquiry into the actions of one Taito Philip Field.
9 comments:
I think AG Brady will be a more relentless and thorough investigator than Ingram. I also understand he will be able to question under oath which should enable him to get to `the guts' of things.
I agree pdm. Brady is the guy to get to the bottom of this. My point in the thread though - is this a genuine move by Clark to get to the truth, or is she cynically shutting down debate until after the election (as she did with TPF), and by so doing, protecting the arses of Ministers Cunliffe and Cosgrove? Sadly, I think it's the latter - that's Clark's modus operandi.
Sounds to me that the truth is so rancid that Clark has no choice but to let Brady loose on this one.
I think Cunliffe is the guy with his head on the block. Unless it was `common knowledge' through out the cabinet before Cosgrove took over he may just get away with saying he took action as soon as he realised how serious things were.
Cunliffe doesn't have that escape route.
David "Boy Wonder" Cunliffe has a few challenges ahead of him. There's a date with the Hign Court in Napier where his decision to sack the HBDHB is being challenged (August 27 from memory), a trip to the witness box in the TPF trial, where he will face cross-examination from TPF's counsel, and now this. The noises that Clark was making last night are that all the Immigration stuff was news to Cabinet, but I'm not so sure - whatever happened to the "no surprises" policy?
"It's fair to say that the confidence of the Cabinet has been somewhat shattered. There are things that obviously never came to our attention.""
I don't buy that.
You know what? Under what used to be NZ's constitution, it doesn't matter whether you buy it or not. Ministerial responsibility is personal: but it is not about the fault of the minister. It is about their honour, dignity, and simple humanity. When your ministry screws up, you resign. You do not complain you weren't briefed; you do not blame civil servants, or HR contractors.
you resign your ministry and seat, and traditionally retire from public life and employment,
serving out your time working unpaid for a charity
David "Boy Wonder" Cunliffe has a few challenges ahead of him
They all do - and the serious corruption inquiries haven't even started yet. Noone in cabinet or the Labour party executive will ever be in government again.
Interesting perspective Anon - you're right about the concept of ministerial responsibility. The current administration has strayed some considerable distance from the accepted standard.
Adam has posted a brief update, number 16, in his quest to try and make sense of this mess
see
http://adamsmith.wordpress.com/2008/05/20/741/
Inventory2 is grateful to Adam - his blog is a veritable treasure trove for anyone wanting to know more about this scandal.
Post a Comment