8. CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) Link to this
to the Minister of Finance
Does he stand by earlier claims that the engagement of ministerial purchase advisers complied with all Public Service requirements for the contracting of staff and that the purchase advisers are covered by the Public Service Code of Conduct?
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) Link to this
Yes. The engagement of purchase advisers did comply with all Public Service requirements for the contracting of staff. I am advised that as they were independent contractors, though, they were not covered by the Public Service Code of Conduct; none of the independent contractors employed by the Public Service, of whom I understand there are hundreds, are.
Why did the Minister insist that the cost of the purchase advisers be met by individual departments rather than be funded through Ministerial Services, as recommended by both Treasury and the State Services Commission?
I asked Treasury and the State Services Commission to come up with satisfactory arrangements for chief executives to employ these purchase advisers. I must say that, for a group of half a dozen experienced, publicly minded people who on average are earning much less than $40,000 for 6 months’ work, the whole exercise has been extremely successful.
Does the Minister agree with the advice provided by the State Services Commission that “If the role of this group is to service Ministers’ offices, it would seem proper that they sit within Ministerial Services; Ministerial Services is set up for this function, and would provide a transparent process.”; if not, why not?
Hon Phil GoffI can tell the former Minister that there was discussion between the State Services Commission and Treasury, and that everyone was satisfied with the arrangements. The Government is particularly satisfied with the fact that, although under Labour political hacks spent all their time wasting taxpayers’ money, these advisers have helped Ministers to save $2 billion of taxpayers’ money.
What confidence can the public of New Zealand have that the Government is sticking to its pre-election commitment to protect the political neutrality of the Public Service, when it has foisted people hand-picked for their political views, such as ACT candidate Graham Scott, on to the books of Government departments at the same time as it is sacking legitimate public servants?
That member would know what it is like to be hand-picked for his political views, and to be paid thousands of dollars—probably hundreds of thousands of dollars—by taxpayers for being a political hack. These advisers have acknowledged high levels of Public Service expertise, and they have assisted the Government in saving $2 billion of taxpayers’ money.