Background checks on public servants
December 1st, 2008 at 8:46 am by David FarrarThe Dom Post reports that police checks on candidates seeking high profile public sector jobs have become routine since the Mary-Anne Thompson affair, along with verification of qualifications.
This seems pretty sensible to me, and kudos to the State Services Commissioner for initiating it.
One aspect seems to be a bit mistaken though:
He said people currently going for senior positions in the state sector – in ministerial offices at Parliament, for example – were now being carefully looked at.
When I worked in the Beehive I needed both a Police check and a “secret” security clearance. In the PMs Office one needed “top secret” so you got vetted far more rigourously than just a Police check. However these checks did not normally take place until some months after you had started work!
Tags: Ministerial Staff, SSC, state sector
December 1st, 2008 at 9:26 am
so why have they not been done for the last 9 years.
Vote:What do we pay GCHG, SIS and Police for?
apart from letting convicted terrorist associating people into NZ.
December 1st, 2008 at 9:37 am
I seem to remeber a few years ago a certain Canadian working in a high profile public boardcasting job in NZ before it was discovered his qualifications were fake. Statements were made that this would never happen again, proper background checks now standard, rah,rah,rah and yet…here we are.
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 11:00 am
NCEA English Q1: Using the following words make a sentence that best describes the function of ‘The State Services Commissioner”: door,the,bolted,has,horse,shutting,the,after,stable. (10 Marks).
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 11:23 am
“No Minister” makes a good point on this issue- who checks the Police? With management stacked with political cronyists and Labour party sycophants, the “Police” need to be checked as much as anybody. Since their complete adulteration by Klark and her political acolytes, can they can ever be trusted to be objective and impartial ever again?
http://nominister.blogspot.com/
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 11:29 am
No Minister makes a good point in relation to this issue- Who checks the Police??
Since their management’s complete adulteration by Klark sycophants and cronies, can they ever be trusted to come up with impartial and objective reports on people seeking government jobs??
http://nominister.blogspot.com/
Cleanse the Police of politically partisan Labour party aparachiks before you ask them to check on anybody.
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 12:04 pm
test
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 12:09 pm
“No Minister” raises a good question on this issue.
Who checks the Police? Since they have become a partisan cronyist extension of the Labour Party are they fit people to be checking on the background of anyone else, and can they be trusted to report objectively and impartially? Clean out their top management of Klark sycophants before giving them this job. Too much opportunity for political mischief.
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Criminal records checks are very useful for pre employment purposes but it is apparent that the employers/recruiters quoted in The Dominion-Post article are uninformed about them because the checks are not “Police checks” as they keep calling them. The checks are in fact carried out by the Ministry of Justice, not the Police. Police only offer a vetting service when applicants are involved with children or other vulnerable people.
In any event, a “police check” or criminal records check with MoJ on Thompson when she was being considered for employment would not have highlighted any discrepencies in her claimed qualifications. It would only identify any criminal history she had acquired in the last 7 years. So she would still have been appointed to the job.
If the State Services Commission and local Wellington recruitment companies now require a criminal records check because of the Thompson affair and concerns about verifying qualifications, then a criminal records check is the wrong method of verification!
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 7:03 pm
When I lived in Aussie I had to undergo a security check to work on assembling harpoon missiles. What a fucking joke, asked what I had done previously I told them I was a farmhand. They sort of fell about laughing and said I wouldn’t be working in the fuse department and they didn’t think I would be much of a security risk. I’m just glad I helped to put these things together as I sure wouldn’t want to push the button to light one up, I bet the bloody things flew backwards.
Vote:December 1st, 2008 at 10:37 pm
IThe background checks that the SIS do are remarkably slow. The security clearance that someone I know had to get to work in a Ministers Office took about 12 months to process. They are quite extensive, but the delay does mean people could slip through the gaps.
Vote:December 2nd, 2008 at 8:57 am
mummified, Thompson as a CEO of a Government department, and probably also from her time in the PM’s department, would have had a security check every five years, so she must have slipped through their system several times during her 15+ years as a public servant…or the checks are not extensive as you suggest.
Vote:December 2nd, 2008 at 9:16 am
SIS = a bunch of ex cops who know no-one can question them. result, a bunch of lazy ex cops.
Vote: