New ACC Chairman

March 9th, 2009 at 4:30 pm by David Farrar

Nick Smith has just announced that John Judge will replace former CTU President Ross Wilson as Chairman of ACC. Other board appointments will be confirmed by the end of March.

Judge has a very strong background in financial management and governance. He was Chief Executive of Ernst & Young for 12 years and serves on a number of boards, and is the Chair of both Te Papa and the Auckland Art Gallery Foundation. So he seems well skilled at balancing financial objectives with wider social objectives. He also is on the advisory boards to both the Auckland University and Otago University Schools of Business.

Labour appointed Judge to the Te Papa Board in 2000, so presumably will find it difficult to attack his appointment to chair ACC.

Tags: , , ,

24 Responses to “New ACC Chairman”

  1. ben (2,366) Says:

    Labour appointed Judge to the Te Papa Board in 2000, so presumably will find it difficult to attack his appointment to chair ACC.

    I imagine they’ll find it quite easy: “he is not a former leader of any trade union” :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Glutaemus Maximus (2,207) Says:

    Just watch the news to-night, and Goff will pompously opine about the healthy state of ACC. How it was so very well managed. That this is a political manouver designed to turn the whole of ACC private.

    How levies will soar, and care will be restricted. Like Labour never had anything to do with it.

    Union Leaders are so well versed in Finance, and Profit and Loss.

    Tui Moment.

    Ross Wilson may be able to tie his own shoe laces, but without the protection of Labour would have been fcked off % years ago!

    What renumeration package was the imbecile on anyway?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. wreck1080 (2,835) Says:

    Labour are saying the sacking is politically motivated. I laugh so much at this.

    Labours original appointment was politically motivated. I mean, why appoint union leaders to business jobs? That , is pathetic and shows the pat me – pat you club.

    The sacking, is in fact, due to gross incompetence. Allowing cost blowouts. Dumping a 2 BILLION DOLLAR bill on the new governments laps. Not advising treasury of appropriate details of massive blowouts .

    If, the current board had kept costs under control , managed risk correctly, and concentrated on core services then perhaps these clowns would still have a job.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. KiwiGreg (2,796) Says:

    No idea on his politics but he is a c*** bad man

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. mickysavage (785) Says:

    This is poor behaviour. All members of Crown boards ought to be very afraid.

    The pay is actually not great compared to the responsibility and expectations and the longevity of the job.

    Wilson is a very competent operator and his appointment was a very important statement of principle as well as being justified because of his ability. Workers have the most invested in ACC and their interests ought to be represented.

    What is the bet that a bunch of accountants and professional director sorts get appointed, and shock horror there is a crisis (that is right there is one now) and then a decision is made supporting privatisation.

    Why is this government so predictable?

    Wreck1080 you are buying the propaganda that Smith is spouting. There is no cost blowout, there has been an increase in treatment costs because good quality medical treatment is, well, expensive, and ACC’s income from its investments has nose dived, as has the income stream from pretty well all funds.

    A government policy decision, to fully fund future claims, has caused costs to increase. We are paying more now so that we will pay less later.

    Smith believes that with enough noise sufficient of us will be sucked in to think there is a crisis.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Don the Kiwi (955) Says:

    So there’s no crisis in ACC, eh, mickeysavage?

    Oh – Ross Wilson must be stumping up with the $2.5Bil. shortfall.

    No ?
    Then that’s why he’s losing his job.

    Besides which, he’s a Labour stooge, and for that alone, deserves the sack.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. PaulD (90) Says:

    Don the Kiwi knows so much about the issue that he’s previously posted that Ross Wilson and Margaret Wilson are related.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. bobux (349) Says:

    micky

    If I recall correctly from the review, administration (i.e. non-medical) costs have been increasing at around 12% per annum. How is this in the interests of ‘the workers’?

    Sorry, but I don’t take very seriously the views of someone who excuses a blatant breach of the Public Finance Act.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Innocent bystander (163) Says:

    Labour stacked the board with their own cronies so they can hardly complain when the new government has a clean out

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. mickysavage (785) Says:

    Innocent bystander. Labour waited for existing terms to expire before replacing members. They also sought balance. There may be some members sympathetic to the government but I can assure you many positions are occupied by persons who would be acceptable to either Government.

    I challenge you to name one Crown or SOE board appointment where

    1. Labour sacked them before their term expired,
    2. The board was stacked with Labour cronies.

    Bobux Treasury has been fingered for the breach of the PFA. The Ministers have been cleared. In any event the news of the requirement of an increase of funding has been well known for a while.

    [DPF: Easy. Acc in 2000. They asked Directors with links to National to resign early.

    And for a Board stacked with Labour cronies try the Electricity Commission]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. adamsmith1922 (803) Says:

    Some thoughts on ACC may be found here

    http://adamsmith.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/acc-running-interference/

    ACC should be run as an insurer not as a welfare agency being used to disguise beneficiary numbers

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. petal (697) Says:

    mickysavage: “Workers have the most invested in ACC and their interests ought to be represented.”

    You self righteous prat. (that’s worth the 20 demerits for personal abuse – I feel better already)

    Well, I have news for you and the rest of your mates – the days of automatic entitlement are over.

    But you are welcome to feel self righteously entitled and outraged that the money machine is empty.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. burt (5,928) Says:

    This would have been an excellent position for Cullen. Key could have said that since Cullen didn’t think there was anything to worry about prior to the election that he could run it and the govt would not be expecting any surprises because if there were any they would have been revealed as legally required prior to the election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. getstaffed (9,188) Says:

    I challenge you to name one Crown or SOE board appointment where … The board was stacked with Labour cronies.

    Where to begin?!? ACC is a good start. Someone else can compile the research, but 9 years of Labour has seen a disgraceful number of ill-prepared, less-than-suitable Labour snouts in the boardroom troughs.

    While I believe any government will consider appointments in light of the candidate’s political alignment, for Labour this was the primary consideration. Loyalty was king. For National this is a also-ran consideration, well behind picking the most qualified person for the demands of the role. (cue mickey at al screaming ‘Bolger’ as if that disproves the Labour snout situation)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. tvb (3,302) Says:

    Most people will recognise Ross Wilson as a political appointment of the Labour Government. So his dismissal will be equally political. There was a secret agenda to turn ACC into a welfare scheme and dump the Bills onto taxpayers. You can make everything work if you are prepared to chuck enough money at it. The Labour Party says cancel the tax cuts and fund all these empty policies. if only there were no tax cuts. But clearly the public want a more balanced approach than this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. campit (368) Says:

    Judge … serves on a number of boards, and is the Chair of both Te Papa and the Auckland Art Gallery Foundation.

    I saw on his CV on 3 News that he is also a director of Fletchers and ANZ.

    Generally speaking, why is appointing a director who is also simultaneously a director of other companies and busy with other projects a good thing? Will his salary reflect this? Isn’t the Chairman of the Board largely symbolic anyway? Wouldn’t now be a good time to cut down the size of the board of ACC? Do we really need boards for every local and central government quango?

    Again, general questions, and not directed at Mr Judge whom I don’t know but I’m sure fills the required criteria for the job, as DPF has described.

    [DPF: The Chairman's role is not fulltime, but it most certainly is not symbolic. They have prime responsibility for the strategy and decision making of the Board. A good Chairman (not saying Mr Wilson was bad) can make an amazing difference - not as much as the CEO, but still a lot]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. dime (6,165) Says:

    hey micky – diddums :P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Glutaemus Maximus (2,207) Says:

    Yep. It is all for the workers.

    Non-contributors have had a free ride, and Employers should get their own cover.

    Me, me, me, me.

    Mickey Mouse ideals, straight from the turn of the last century.

    Is Winston getting his old company car on ACC?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. campit (368) Says:

    A good Chairman (not saying Mr Wilson was bad) can make an amazing difference – not as much as the CEO, but still a lot

    So is there an iPredict stock on when the ACC CEO goes? Priced at about 98c if there is, I’d say.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Don the Kiwi (955) Says:

    PaulD 5.55 pm.

    They are related – maybe not by blood, but certainly by family – the Marx family.

    That’s Karl Marx – but it could well be to Groucho, Harpo etc. because of their political leanings. :mrgreen:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. grumpyoldhori (2,342) Says:

    Interesting, run the ACC the same as an insurance company.
    Would that also include the stunt after one has been injured and goes back to work to have the injury flare again in six months with a small problem if one has income protection insurance.
    The stunt where they turn the claim down because since it is a new financial year ,it was a pre existing condition.
    Yep, i should have read the small print on page nine about pink elephants
    So run the ACC like that ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. petal (697) Says:

    grumpyoldhori – get a better advisor. Caveat Emptor. You get what you pay for.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. tvb (3,302) Says:

    Wilson is quite possibly a competent operator. But he is a welfarist. He was slowly bankrupting the ACC scheme on some agenda to bounce the National Government to stump up with huge dollops of cash for a greatly expanded welfare scheme. He had to go.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. slijmbal (976) Says:

    “ACC should be run as an insurer not as a welfare agency being used to disguise beneficiary numbers”

    I don’t get why ACC exists – why do we have treatment subsidised different ways and amounts if I trip running than if I catch a cold? – both are easily termed accidents.

    We have a welfare system use it

    We do not pre-fund treatments for diabetes but we do for pulling a back muscle!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.