tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post926822644441619808..comments2023-09-19T19:45:50.854+12:00Comments on Spanblather: Further thoughts on the Setchell AffairSpanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16896745511007816190noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-42063905482780235152007-08-05T13:33:00.000+12:002007-08-05T13:33:00.000+12:00j1 (Jordan?) I agree that Ministers need to be com...j1 (Jordan?) I agree that Ministers need to be comfortable with some of their officials - those in their own office. But you cannot demand that they vet every person in the whole Ministry, that is both unworkable and undesirable.<BR/><BR/>And Whaleoil, it rather cracks me up that I am "principled" when I just happen to agree with you.Spanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16896745511007816190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-37000595458702275752007-08-04T09:57:00.000+12:002007-08-04T09:57:00.000+12:00j1 wrote:If a Minister has a problem with a propos...j1 wrote:<BR/>If a Minister has a problem with a proposed senior manager, or one actually in position, for any reason - personal style, methods of communicating, etc - then they have the right to have a different person in position.<BR/><BR/>I reply:<BR/>No, j1, I don't that's true. Believe it or not, there are still folks out there who have 'problems' with women in senior management roles, ethnic or religious minorities, and homosexuals. If you think that's a legitimate criteria for employment, then I'd respectfully suggest Parliament itself took a rather different view when it passed the Human Rights Act, and subsequent amendments. <BR/><BR/>OTOH, politicians have a long history of preaching one standard to everyone else, and doing the exact opposite so you may well be right.Craig Ranapiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08923246310584658857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-89634920626786285482007-08-02T10:42:00.000+12:002007-08-02T10:42:00.000+12:00Span - I think the key problem in this whole affai...Span - I think the key problem in this whole affair - about the substance, that is - is that Ministers have to be comfortable with the officials they work with.<BR/><BR/>If a Minister has a problem with a proposed senior manager, or one actually in position, for any reason - personal style, methods of communicating, etc - then they have the right to have a different person in position.<BR/><BR/>That does not translate to firing people of course, which is also what didn't happen here. People get moved around in the public service all the time.<BR/><BR/>BP had to go because he didn't tell the truth about what happened. Not because of what happened. In my opinion.Jordan Carterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00722110022945310097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-31596868780343543782007-08-01T09:29:00.000+12:002007-08-01T09:29:00.000+12:00A very good post and one of the reasons why yours ...A very good post and one of the reasons why yours in one of the very few left blog I read and do not comment on. <BR/><BR/>You always seem to have a principled view on matters and do not just vomit out the party line. <BR/><BR/>Well doneWhaleoilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00678132752321342863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-69172534324792220452007-07-31T14:52:00.000+12:002007-07-31T14:52:00.000+12:00Gerrit:To be pragmatic to a fault, it's not only a...Gerrit:<BR/><BR/>To be pragmatic to a fault, it's not only a bad thing but utterly impractical. Putting aside the partisan sneers for a moment, it's at least notionally workable in the United States that a whole tier of their civil service are direct and explicitly political appointments. There's not only a much larger pool of candidates on both sides of the aisle (a good proportion of who would actually reach basic levels of competence and not merely been cronies and sycophants), but there's also the notional check and balance of most such positions requiring Congressional confirmation after public hearings. <BR/><BR/>Don't see a similar model working in a country whose whole population is about half that of New York City.Craig Ranapiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08923246310584658857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-22998926436926016392007-07-30T21:58:00.000+12:002007-07-30T21:58:00.000+12:00What I see this leading up to is every time there ...What I see this leading up to is every time there is a change of government a whole bunch of people (potentially every three years) looking for another job and having to work outside of the public service while waiting for a government to be elected who will employ them.<BR/><BR/>Not sure if that is a good thing. <BR/><BR/>But then again, time spent working in the private sector will broaden the mind and expose the public servants to the coalface of reality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-90487790283046321312007-07-30T20:25:00.000+12:002007-07-30T20:25:00.000+12:00Span. A very thought provoking comment! It made me...Span. A very thought provoking comment! It made me recall the situation of a good friend of mine who was a Union rep and at the same time married to the acting CEO! Talk about the union hopping into bed with the management! But when union and management can work and talk together - great things are possible for all. <BR/>The underlying principle for all - is mutual respect and consideration by both sides one for the other. Just as in any good marriage, if there is mutual respect and trust for each other, then there is no reason why both partners should not hold different viewpoints.<BR/><BR/>MacroAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-8498997062741425062007-07-30T16:59:00.000+12:002007-07-30T16:59:00.000+12:00Definitely no apology necessary Craig, no worries....Definitely no apology necessary Craig, no worries. You prodded me to think deeper about my position and that is A Good Thing, thanks.<BR/><BR/>I guess my experience is that it actually isn't about keeping your mouth shut, as the person with the information. It's actually about being able to share within your relationship and know that it isn't going to go any further. I pretty much never tell someone a secret and expect them to keep it from their partner - but I do expect them and their partner not to share it with anyone else. <BR/><BR/>That could be the same in the public service/political circles - Setchell could share with Taylor about her job (and vice versa) and know that he won't use it against her or her employer, because he knows that would be beyond the pale. Given he has a long past as a journalist I think that's entirely do-able.Spanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16896745511007816190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7380804.post-73512871719138391842007-07-30T16:08:00.000+12:002007-07-30T16:08:00.000+12:00But something Craig wrote struck a particular nerv...<I>But something Craig wrote struck a particular nerve within me. I had commented that I was often judged on the political activity of my partner, and that I had hated it, and Craig thought this made my view of the Setchell Affair even worse.</I><BR/><BR/>First, Span, please accept my absolute and unconditional apology if any comment I made on this issue felt like I was playing the woman not the ball. (Memo to self: Rugby metaphor not working. Stop it!) You put forward a POV in good faith, and I respect it as such.<BR/><BR/>What I found "even worse" was the subtext - what the hell, it was a pretty blatant text - that we're still debating whether the little woman can be trusted to keep her damn mouth shut. And I stand by my comment that we never seem to be having these kinds of conversations around the equally real <I>potential</I> conflicts of interest where men are concerned.<BR/><BR/>I just find it really hard to get my head around that this b.s. is going on in 2007... And I certainly hope that when there's a change of Government - and sorry, folks, it is going to happen - that John Key isn't going to be dishing out ministerial warrants to paranoid loons who want to purge Wellywood of folks (quite literally) sleeping with the enemy.Craig Ranapiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08923246310584658857noreply@blogger.com