A great waste of money
March 22nd, 2010 at 1:00 pm by David FarrarPhil Kitchin keeps up his good work in exposing government wrongdoing and waste. His latest is on a $3 million TPK contract:
The sloppiness of a $3 million contract to help Maori businesses earn export dollars is revealed in documents showing consultants received hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money – for targets they couldn’t prove they had met. Phil Kitchin reports.
The debacle over the suspended Tekau Plus project has drawn an admission from Te Puni Kokiri chief executive Leith Comer that the government agency has a “big lesson” to learn.
The project has been frozen and Mr Comer now concedes the contract was extraordinarily loose and wishy washy.
Project bosses repeatedly relied on management cliches about “outputs”, “establishing soft network clusters” and “bigger picture value propositions” when they were pressed for proof that goals were being achieved.
That should ring warning bells.
At one stage those running the Tekau project refused to provide details, claiming commercial sensitivity – even though they were spending taxpayer money and the government department that gave it to them wanted to know how it was being used.
And that should have rung even bigger warning bells.
A report by PricewaterhouseCoopers, obtained by The Dominion Post, shows that in one three-month period taxpayers forked out $60,000 for project consultants to analyse seven media stories, eight economic updates, a business awards list, a 13-page essay and reports on an education programme.
Now repeat after me – there is no waste in Government. Yeah Right.
In another three-month period consultants received $33,000 for analysis and research including “developing a strategy for a clear strategy forward” and “ensuring offshore studies add value”.
Developing a strategy for a strategy – they must have been pissing themselves with laughter when they wrote that response.
THE leadup to the Tekau project being suspended began in October last year – two years after it began and after two-thirds of the $3 million in funds had been spent.
So it begin in October 2007.
The one bright light there is that TPK at least realised they were being fobbed off and kept going back asking for proof of outputs. However they should have acted far more quickly in terminating funding, in my opinion.
Related posts:
- What a waste of $500,000
- Housing NZ’s IT
- Audit Office on Hawke’s Bay District Health Board
- The waste-o-meter
March 22nd, 2010 at 1:17 pm
Am I surprised ?
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 1:18 pm
Yeah but how did they have a process whereby spending money against outputs which were either immeasurable or not measured was allowed? (I mean I can guess – program spending approved by Cabinet and then TPK awarding the contract and then just paying out on every invoice marked with the program name and some clown not actually checking they were getting anything in return). Ignoring the fact the entire program was a waste of money even if proper procedures were followed. (Want to encourage entrepreneurs, leave the $3m in their hands).
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Another rotting pile of corruption in Wellywood. Lucky they are the windy City to change the air minute by minute.
Vote:Cripes I could write those reports for 1% of the wasted two mill and still have been laughing at the gullibility of TPK.
March 22nd, 2010 at 1:33 pm
just wait for whanau ora
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 1:54 pm
I have a theory about government reporting of the sort mentioned in this article: negative productivity.
When a report like those get written, not only is the time and effort of the people who wrote it completely wasted (meaning zero productivity), the time spent by anybody else reading it is completely wasted, thus preventing them possibly doing something useful – on the whole, negative productivity.
Had the report not been written, total value of production would have been higher, thus negative productivity.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 1:59 pm
“So it begin in October 2007.”
I like how this bit gets to be a paragraph all of its own – lest we forget who the REAL bad guys are.
If you’re still blogging in 2047, you’ll still be pegging news stories to the Clark government. Guaranteed.
[DPF: No, but when something started under her Government, of course I will point that out. I guarantee you in three years times I will be referring to the Clark Govt a minute fraction compared to how often in the 2000s the left referred to the 90s as responsible for all things bad]
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 2:01 pm
@ RRM yup – the Nats should have stopped this as soon as they got their hands on the keys. But Labour was dumb to start it.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 3:04 pm
In another three-month period consultants received $33,000 for analysis and research including “developing a strategy for a clear strategy forward” and “ensuring offshore studies add value”.
sounds like a big wankfest to me…these turkeys are laughing all the way to the bank at our expense.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 3:12 pm
“developing a strategy for a clear strategy forward” and “ensuring offshore studies add value”.
Surely this isn’t a quote from Dilbert?
http://www.dilbert.com/2010-03-13/
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 3:18 pm
They had a study on studies?
Yes you are wasting money… we’ll have to set up a study group to look into that. We feed these people becuase…
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 3:22 pm
No surprises More of the same old same old And heh Just wait until that BILLION DOLLAR health programme what ever its called gets going.
Troughers will be lining up licking their lips. there will be no improvement Its a big fat waste of MY money.
If you cant/wont measure it using clearly defined KPIs then you cant/wont manage it.
But heh thats how these taxpayer fund scamsters operate.
And as for Comer. What a pathetic w…… If he cant figure out a conn by now after all the years hes been presiding then hes an incompetent.
Or worse………………………….
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 4:38 pm
Right now there will be Labour supporters reading this who think what we need now is a new study to ensure that “studies to ensure offshore studies add value” add value…
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Possibly up to 50% of what the Government spends money on is a total waste of the taxpayers money but who is brave enough to stop it?
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 4:51 pm
Possibly up to 50% of what the Government spends money on is a total waste of the taxpayers money but who is brave enough to stop it?
ACT …they will be gettin my 2 ticks next election…I didnt vote National last election for more of the same ole same liarbor shite.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 5:00 pm
The most amusing is the arrogance and contempt they show by using the descriptors they used.
I mean they didnt even try to be convincing It was a big single digit to the taxpayer.
And that folks sums up just how bad the public service ( cough) has really become.
Like the pollies for the last decade they have a sense of entitlement so when the w…. Comer lets a contract to his mates he doesnt even bother that the TOR etc make any sort of sense.
because he can just say Oh sorry we will a bit better next time and get away with it because the Nat pollies are soft cocks.
He should have been fired for being an incompetent w……
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 5:14 pm
National is the “soft cock” party and Liarbour, well they have angry Trevor. Say no more. Politicians are parasitic scum of the earth. Sack them all and put some REAL PEOPLE in there to do the job!
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 5:39 pm
What people do you suggest d4j?
How do you suggest they are put into the job?
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Stephen Tindall would be a front runner for the role of Number 1. I concur with DFJ…pollys really are scumsucking leeches out to feather their own nests at our expense. Sack ‘em all and start again.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 5:55 pm
“Stephen Tindall would be a front runner for the role of Number 1. ”
Number 1 what? Wet blanket nanny stater? Hypocrite?
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 5:59 pm
No 1 out of a team of 12 good business people. We dont need 120 losers running the countries chequebook like we have got.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 6:10 pm
@ starboard I guess we will need to agree to differ on that.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 6:25 pm
Why? Are you happy with the the current rabble/system?
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 6:56 pm
Fire ahead. All you need to do is arrange for 61 (or so) better candidates to stand at next year’s election in one or more associated parties and convince a majority of voters to vote for them.
Vote:March 22nd, 2010 at 8:17 pm
Let’s play Buzzword Bingo!
Vote:My bulls*t meter pegged 11 with those creative phrases – TPK are incometent if they didn’t cut them off at the knees for crap like that.
Maori + government money = rort and wastage, 10 times out if 10.
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:35 pm
PricewaterhouseCoopers, obtained by The Dominion Post, shows that in one three-month period taxpayers forked out $60,000 for project consultants to analyse seven media stories.
Yet.. another hangover of years of a over bureaucratic very paranoid controlling Labour government.
Vote:National has a lot of work to do.. just changing the culture of the civil service.. just one of which is wasting money on hiring consultants to do their jobs in order to make them look good.
March 23rd, 2010 at 8:17 am
Starboard, I heard it was 60 percent wasted. The news came out hard against the anti-smacking referendum about wasting 9 million of taxpayers money when it wasn’t binding. . Being a taxpayer I think the 9 million was well spent because it showed the stupidity of John Key, mmp and the direction the country wants to go. This Tekau project was throwing good money after bad and this my fellow taxpayers is only the flake on the tip of tip of the iceberg. My point is politicians are against the populace taking control and wastes money on projects that have no results. The only possible way to circumvent these politicians is to make referendums binding. It would put politicians in check and bring control back to the voters. Would it avoid waste?? I think it would have an effect.
Vote:March 23rd, 2010 at 10:37 am
jackp – Well actually it shows the stupidity of the previous government for refusing to hold the referendum at the same time as the election, for the purely political reason that they didn’t want the public to be reminded of it when they went in to vote.
Vote:March 23rd, 2010 at 5:50 pm
Put it, your right and Helen Clark is a master at avoiding those things. I am talking about how John Key sided with Sue Bradford and called it too ambiguous and chose to ignore it even after the results showed the public wanted the anti-smacking law changed.
Vote: