1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. NZ.GENERAL

  • Government Policy and Civil Servants.

    From Crash@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 17 14:37:36 2024
    This is a disturbing development:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350336380/top-te-whatu-ora-staff-member-demoralised-smokefree-backtrack

    It is not the role of the Civil Service to block or sabotage
    government policy.

    The repeal of the Smokefree Act 2022 was well signaled in the
    coalition agreement between National and ACT (presumably springing
    from ACT policy). If Civil Servants cannot find it within themselves
    to serve the elected Government, for any reason, they should be
    required to resign. The Civil Service is primarily there to deliver
    as directed by the Government.

    No exceptions.

    I have some sympathy for the argument that every CEO or department
    head that reports to a Cabinet Minister should, after every election,
    be asked to affirm (or otherwise) their intention to follow the policy directions that affect their department. Failure to affirm is a form
    of resigning their position.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gordon@21:1/5 to Crash on Wed Jul 17 04:10:50 2024
    On 2024-07-17, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
    This is a disturbing development:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350336380/top-te-whatu-ora-staff-member-demoralised-smokefree-backtrack

    It is not the role of the Civil Service to block or sabotage
    government policy.

    The repeal of the Smokefree Act 2022 was well signaled in the
    coalition agreement between National and ACT (presumably springing
    from ACT policy). If Civil Servants cannot find it within themselves
    to serve the elected Government, for any reason, they should be
    required to resign. The Civil Service is primarily there to deliver
    as directed by the Government.

    No exceptions.

    Totally, the ballot box rules, otherwise why have and election.

    I have some sympathy for the argument that every CEO or department
    head that reports to a Cabinet Minister should, after every election,
    be asked to affirm (or otherwise) their intention to follow the policy directions that affect their department. Failure to affirm is a form
    of resigning their position.

    They are not forced into the job and they must know that a conflict of
    interest might arise on the change of Government. This sense of entitlement
    is often shown from the Left.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Crash on Wed Jul 17 03:29:34 2024
    Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
    This is a disturbing development:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350336380/top-te-whatu-ora-staff-member-demoralised-smokefree-backtrack

    It is not the role of the Civil Service to block or sabotage
    government policy.

    The repeal of the Smokefree Act 2022 was well signaled in the
    coalition agreement between National and ACT (presumably springing
    from ACT policy). If Civil Servants cannot find it within themselves
    to serve the elected Government, for any reason, they should be
    required to resign. The Civil Service is primarily there to deliver
    as directed by the Government.

    No exceptions.

    I have some sympathy for the argument that every CEO or department
    head that reports to a Cabinet Minister should, after every election,
    be asked to affirm (or otherwise) their intention to follow the policy >directions that affect their department. Failure to affirm is a form
    of resigning their position.


    Yes I agree totally. If Mr Chamberlain's efforts to persuade the minister had failed and he felt strongly enough then he should have quietly resigned. That is what a professional would do.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)