Report shows ACC blowout hidden by minsiters

It concludes that Michael Cullen, the ACC, the Department of Labour, Treasury and ACC Minister Maryan Street knew about the $1.5bn shortfall in the non-earners account in time for it to be disclosed as a fiscal risk in the Pre-election Fiscal Update despite their claims.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10559739

The full report (pdf): http://beehive.govt.nz/sites/all/files/ACCFinalReport.pdf

Only last week Dr Cullen said he would be cleared of covering up the billion-dollar blowout.

Rob, Rob, Rob, Rob, Rob. That was the worst spin release from English I've ever seen. The report puts ALL the blame on Treasury, ALL OF IT.
It didn't "find the Government hid it at all". English lied, hardly surprising.

From the report:


Treasury, Treasury, Treasury. It's all through the report with ZERO comment that either the Minister of Finance or ACC had any role in the risk not making the PREFU.
I think it would have been genuine of the Govt to raise the issue as they got it, but English is flat out ignoring the report and making up bullshit quotes.

Ha ha.. for sure. His point should have been more: Cullen, by omission - not lying, obscured the position. He had every opportunity to know it was wrong (you can't really prove someone knew something - but if Cullen didn't it meant he didn't read the info he was getting or get told by the Maryan Street which, in itself, is negligence).



Just accept that Cullen is one of those people skilled enough to not get caught lying - but has also been in the system long enough to live by the notion that being 'technically right' is somehow the same to being morally and an acceptable standard for elected officials - which it absolutely is not (the same reason Winnie is unworthy of trust). By omission from the many people directly involved (and who had in all likelihood seen the information) the real state of affairs was incorrectly painted to the country. That they didn't correct the position when given opportunities to do so shows a pretty sad level of arrogance.

English should just frame it more like this and he'd get better mileage too without having to make stuff up.

Absolutely - unfortunately this Government is continuing the awful tradition of the end of the last Government in spinning every single thing that comes out. "The stimulus that wasn't" is another perfect example.

The report writers didn't even bother interviewing the previous minister - thats how little they had to do with it.

I guess they suspected that if they asked Dr Cullen 'did you omit the figures deliberately' he might just have said 'nope' - which isn't exactly evidence/proof of anything.

Evidence in the form of notifications, report dates etc should be enough. As I said above, proving someone knew something is impossible. But establishing that the info had been sent and that it was part of their responsibility to be up to date with it is what has happened.

Misleading by omission should be Winston Peter's department, not Dr Cullen and Maryan Street's.

ACC board members sacked - surely a serious National agenda going on here, long-term, not just minor tweaking of ACC?

Absolutely - see my "template" post in the prisons thread.
Turfed out a CTU, Labour-voting chairmen and installed a Business Roundtable member. Not that ACC doesn't need to sort out it's claims to levies approach, but come on

I think, when you win, you're entitled to load organisations like this how you want. It's not as is Labour aren't the crony employing masters. If this guy is ideologically biased according to the Nats then he's got to go.

Remember Labour also rushed through a pile of appointments just before the elections in various roles/boards - as if their winning the election was as likely as rain. It's a bit had to fault any party for doing it when they're in the driver seat.

Rob: give up on the "Labour were just as bad" lines with me - I roundly despise the lot of them so I agree
And it still doesn't make it right, swinging from ideology to ideology as opposed to getting a non-partisan civil service of decent managers.

I should add that I imagine John Judge will actually be a highly capable chairman.

Yeah the days of top bureaucrats being apolitical seems well and truly gone (even though board members arent really). National working with ex union bosses is a bit of a stretch. They were political appointees and as much as i dislike the american system overall i think they have the right idea in that resignations are tendered at the govt change over. I am aware their system differs significantly.


Werent most of the board union members? Seems like a bit of jobs for the old boys(and girls).

Yeah I would, but the tone of posts here all too often maligns Nats for things, blindly ignoring that Labour were the pros at it and took it to a new level.

(see thread about knighthoods - many of the most maligned businessmen ever knighted were often done so under Labour, and many of their own mates were honoured for basically doing their job - poorly in some cases)

Just FYI then - I will give the Government a load of crap, regardless of what parties make them up (although ACT in there makes it so much easier ) and regardless of how bad previous ones were...

An excellent article (as usual) from Brian Fallow on this:
For the Government to wrap legitimate concerns about slippage in ACC's performance in a whole lot of shrill scaremongering and scapegoating is gratuitous.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10561167

that IS a good article, quite balanced

unfortunately ACC is always going to be a bit of a political football in the way that employment laws have been - both areas are susceptible to ideological tinkering and reform

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2257183/Labour-attacks-Smiths-behaviour

I had heard about this but Christ almighty. Barging into select committee hearings, refusing to let ACC management answer direct questions, and claiming an actuary is biased because he wrote a complimentary article about Dr Cullen...

What the fuck is going on with this ACC rubbish?

the lunatics have taken over the asylum

Trying to push along the management who turned into lunatics by being there for too long.

push? Seems more like a ideological cull to me

An embedded idealogical cult being moved along by a new ideological cult can't exactly cry foul too loud on that subject imo.

The left's history of cronyism easily as bad as the right's.

(and, yes, I did mistake cull for cult )

I won't disagree with you on that Rob - for I imagine you're probably right and am not going to go check

I could ask was Labour's previous cull(s) seemingly so badly handled?

And another reasoned analysis from Rod Oram:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/business/2262350/Rod-Oram-ACC-the-political-claims-and-the-reality