“We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office”
— Aesop, 600 BC

Your 2.20 explanantion makes even less sense than your original claim.

Appointing a former finance minister to an SOE board validates the decisions the government made on his watch, but appointing a former prime minister to an SOE board doesn’t? If you say so, Rob, if you say so.

Your suggestion that Richardon and Birch were the power behind the throne in the last National government shows that you are either completely ignorant of the dynamics of that government (such as the significant policy differences between Richardson/Birch) or that you are just spinning. Or both.

I can only imagine how disconsolate Labour bloggers must be if the Father of the House resigning to become Chair of NZ Post sparks such an outbreak of exuberence. Ahem, deputy Chair. Ahem ahem, deputy Chair at some point in the future. Its almost as if he was desperate not to have to sit around in caucus with towering intellects like the Hon. Parekura Horomia, George Hawkins and Ashraf Choudhary

means he has a talent for doing really stupid things

1 more time – being intellectualy smart is of surprisingly minimal benefit in business – most academics are crap in the real world – being pragmatic, principled, focussed, consistent, detail oriented, understanding and getting on with people and lots of other character traits have a more signficant bearing on success than the ability to do sums in one’s head.

For instance, his apparent inability to recognise and learn from his failures is very strongly against him as that ability is often seen in successful commercial people. At least Bolger has pragmatism on his side – another trait of successful people.

cullen’s behaviour over a long period indicates he does not have the right commercial traits.

So what’s the Board to do? What would you do, if you were Key, looking at that?

Fair call. However I don’t think I would want somebody who would think it was just perfect to fleece the profitable side of the business more (while denigrating them and disenfranchising them) to prop up the failing side of the business so it has no need to change it’s ways. I don’t think Cullen is the right person to manage structural changes. He’ll be stumped if he can’t just put up postal rates and employ more people to get all the indicators looking good.

a sympathetic union guy on the board will grease the cogs

Yes but I rather suspect the EPMU will take one look at Cullen and mutter something like ‘rich prick’ which would be pleasing but not particularly productive or in line with my comment above.

If you want my prediction, the Post Group will be prepared for break-up over the next three years. Cullen said tonight that he would not have joined the Board if Post was being prepared for sale, but as I said above, Post is a highly diversified group.

National’s instinct is that the market is best and state companies can’t operate effectively due to political considerations compromising commercial imperatives. The GFC is entering a phase where that issue is going to surface, big-time.

The postal delivery function as we know it can’t operate profitably without volume. OTOH, other companies in the group like Kiwibank in the last quarter just had extremely high growth.

So what’s the Board to do? What would you do, if you were Key, looking at that?

I kind of buy the Union position. My mother was a postie, one a bike (I blame her for my love of cycling). Anyway long story short. Local postie is pedaling down the street here a few months back swerving like he was drunk. I watched him approach and noticed he had a flat tyre. I offered him a tube, it takes but minutes to change one. He refused, said he didn’t have far to go and continued off to do more damage to his back rim.

It’s not his bike, why would he care about it. Piss all of the bad ‘the company is rich it can pay’ mentality has been kicked out of Post at the grass roots. There is much shaking to occur and a sympathetic union guy on the board will grease the cogs.

He’s either over-estimating Cullens talents or he’s just ‘playing the age old game’

Well Cullen’s talents are quite considerable. You don’t get to become a master of the house in the way he has, without some clues. Possibly his operational strategy isn’t very well developed, but that’s why you have other minds like the CEO and the other Board members there.

The Board’s role is to assess the external environment: i.e. analyse trends and risks and develop exploitative and counter-strategies. Maybe Cullen is lacking in various aspects due to his somewhat commercially restricted academic/Parliamentary background, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t lacking in everything that’s needed and he does have other members to fill the gaps.

We don’t know what Key/Power has planned for future appointments but one thing I’ll bloody put money on, they won’t be making appointments for purely ideological or political payoff reasons in the same way the previous mob did it. He’s not driven by the same calculations that Hulun was. This is not power at all costs and it’s not cheap payoff to avoid some trivial consequence at the expense of the taxpayer. This is about building a future. Key is focused on that in the same way that Hulun was focused on power. That’s how I’m starting to measure his decisions.

(I’m standing with hand on heart whistling “God Defend…” right now….)

How much did we pay for Rail? Who said it was looking up and ACC levies might come down?

Look absolutely, burt. But just because he did some really fucked things doesn’t mean he doesn’t have talent…

Whom of those two would you rate “most likely to succeed?”

It’s actually a good question. I would actually rate Bolger as more likely to succeed. He’s a smarter operator in my opinion. Bolger also had a life before politics outside of academia.

Cullen is more of a Wikipedia administrator rather than a bound edition of Britannica. Bound editions can’t be retrospectively changed.

Just as well there will be health competition for their votes from ACT in 2011.

What worries me is exemplified by this,

NZ Parliament Order paper, 1. Economy—Recent Developments – 12th April 2009

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Prior to the Reserve Bank forecasts today, which confirm that the economic outlook is consistent with the pessimistic views of Treasury before Christmas, I saw one comment from Dr Cullen in September. He was quoted as saying that the worst was over now and he was very confident the economy would start to pick up in December.

Hon Dr Michael Cullen: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You may recall your ruling previously, that Ministers are not responsible for any comments they made before the election. It is hard to see, therefore, how they can be responsible for comments that I made before the election—even less so.

He has no more idea than the rest of us but he rambled on with his own conviction anyway. How much did we pay for Rail? Who said it was looking up and ACC levies might come down?

But sure he can play the rules; shamelessly in fact.

you almost agree

“nothing more than a quid pro quo and unwritten convention amongst parliamentarians.”

Yes but Cullen’s obviously being positioned to take over as Chairman from Bolger.

Whom of those two would you rate “most likely to succeed?”

NZPost is supposedly a commercial operation – with irritating components like making a profit – reducing operating costs and increasing revenue – of course cullen would not have a clue how to do all of the above – tax, tax, tax a bit more, oh and we forgot a bit of tax there does not work in a commercial environment

Key is just removing an irritant from parliament and putting him in a set of circumstances he will be unable to cause issues for national going forward – admitedly a painful exercise but probably the best in the long term

Could be seen as very pragmatic or very cynical

Reid – brightness does not equate to effectiveness

I remind you of Keys decision on the SIS investigations on sitting MP’s. This is nothing more than placing yourself as an elite (and in an MMP environment he’s wrong)

What I’d really like to know is was this Keys decision – or the advice of an advisor? He’s either over-estimating Cullens talents or he’s just ‘playing the age old game’