Silliness from Little

June 13th, 2012 at 1:35 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Cabinet minister should be the next scalp in the ” crisis”, Labour’s says.

Chief executive Ralph Stewart quit this morning following a boardroom clean out which has claimed chair John Judge, deputy John McCliskie and another director Rob Campbell.

That is either silliness by Andrew Little, or him trying to get escape the consequences of the defamation suit over his earlier remarks.

The Opposition has called for the Chair and CEO to go. That is exactly what has happened. They should be thanking the Minister for actually taking action to fix ACC’s culture.

Collins has been the Minister since December 2011. The Board and CEO all pre-date her.

Andrew may not like the fact that the Minister is suing him. His call for her to resign has no basis in substance.

I think it shows that Little is more concerned about utu against the Minister for suing him, rather than genuinely wanting change at ACC.

UPDATE: Stuff reports:

However, Green party MP Kevin Hague said Collins must stay on the job.

The “sick entitlement culture” in the House was the “big picture issue.”

“The minister who presided over that, Nick Smith; the hatchet man that he appointed, John Judge; and now Ralph Stewart – [their departures] were necessary steps to begin the process of refreshing the organisation.

“Now, in terms of Collins’ culpability around that – she wasn’t the minister that required all those changes. She has actually dealt to Judge, although I would have preferred a more explicit sacking.

“She’s clearly said ACC’s privacy sackings are unacceptable and must change and that’s actually a pretty good start. She may be the minister to do all this.”

I think this shows the stark differences between Greens and Labour. Kevin Hague actually cares about the people who have had a bad experience with ACC. He want to improve things – not just to score political points. This is in stark contrast to Labour’s Little who sees ACC purely as a political issue to help Labour gain their rightful place governing the masses.

I’ve never had a problem congratulating Labour Ministers when they do something right. Little seems incapable of doing the same with Collins.

Tags: , ,

21 Responses to “Silliness from Little”

  1. Cobolt (82 comments) says:

    But the minister responsible has resigned! Remember Nick Smith?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. mikenmild (10,601 comments) says:

    Perhaps we’ll wait to get to the bottom of the leak from the Minister’s office before worrying about more resignations.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Mark (1,356 comments) says:

    Little should just keep his trap shut. National is doing enough damage to itself at present without any assistance from the stupid remarks from the sidelines. ACC is potentially far worse than the Parata cock up and Collins is going to be working to try to limit the damage. The scrutiny will go on her appointments to the Board to see if they will make any difference to the organisation

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. graham (2,214 comments) says:

    I don’t think Andrew is necessarily being silly here. In general, the premise that “the buck stops at the top” is justifiable.

    But in this particular case, I do tend to agree with Kevin Hague (also quoted in the Stuff article), who said Collins is actually dealing to the issues, and therefore should stay.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Actually National has been in government since November 2008. No surprises that you should be making excuses. Maybe after 6 years in government you will still be making them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    From the same Stuff article:

    “[Collins] said Stewart and Judge had her backing in going to the police. ‘If they hadn’t done that I think they would have been possibly accused of not taking action to protect people’s files and privacy.’”

    Hmmm so Collins has the same lack of judgment that Stewart and Judge had. Collins’ argument is invalid because the police complaint about Pullar was all about smearing her and accusing her of something for which there was no evidence. It had nothing to do with protecting people’s files and privacy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Nookin (3,033 comments) says:

    Ross69
    You have commented on the thread “More ACC Directors to go” and so, presumably, you read DPF’s intro and the quotation – particularly this one:

    “Ms Collins said she had seen a legal opinion prepared by Hugh Rennie, QC, for Mr Judge, which backed the decision to refer Ms Pullar to police over her refusal to return private details about thousands of other ACC claimants she was accidentally sent and blackmail claims. ”

    Could you explain, in detail, with reference to fact and legal principles, where Hugh Rennie QC erred and why you consider it would have been an error of judgment to rely on his opinion?

    Just asking.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Nookin

    I quoted Collins who used a bullshit excuse to back Stewart and Judge. Maybe you’d like to respond to that.

    Judge and Stewart went to police because Pullar had the temerity to go public with ACC’s incompetence. Have you looked at the long list of ACC’s alleged failings as mentioned by her?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. trout (898 comments) says:

    I was under the impression that Stewart and Judge went to the Police because Boag and Pullar had brought a gun to a swordfight.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Yvette (2,684 comments) says:

    It is likely that neither Judge, Stewart or Hugh Rennie had heard of Pullar’s tape – Judge and Stewart’s word against Pullar and Boag until that emerged.

    But one wonders, in Little’s case, what all a Conflict of Interest may now encompass.
    Should Shearer not name another spokesperson in the interim?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Alan Wilkinson (1,812 comments) says:

    @Nookin, the “blackmail claims” were demonstrably false, possibly even true in reverse (ACC were making support conditional on secrecy about their blunder) and you can’t “return” an email.

    Apart from that it’s possible but uncertain that Rennie was entirely correct.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Michael Mckee (1,091 comments) says:

    Ross
    Why didn’t Pullar delete the data and inform ACC?
    Why did she bring the data up with another personal matter?
    Why did she take Boag along?

    Sorry mate, her behavior was a risk element to ACC and the data and they had to refer to police as it was clear she hadn’t destroyed it and hadn’t handed it over immediately she could but kept it.

    come on explain that away.
    She should as should Boag.

    Oh and should you not know I did not vote National.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Alan Wilkinson (1,812 comments) says:

    “Why didn’t Pullar delete the data and inform ACC?” She did inform ACC. She held the data to make sure ACC did something about its security stuff-ups.

    “Why did she bring the data up with another personal matter?” She didn’t. The ACC reps connected the two.

    “Why did she take Boag along?” Probably as a witness/reference/advocate. Why shouldn’t she?

    “they had to refer to police”. They didn’t have to lie about her making blackmail threats.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Nookin (3,033 comments) says:

    Alan

    I agree that there appears to be no evidence of blackmail. The comment made by Boag was unfortunate and silly. She should have known better. My point is that few peiople are covering themselves in glory over this. Collins, however, seems to be doing the right thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Why didn’t Pullar delete the data and inform ACC?

    She did delete the data! Seems the facts don’t get in the way of your rant. The real question is, why did ACC go to police to complain about Pullar after she had alleged threatened officials several months earlier? Must’ve have been a non-existent threat if officials waited several months to complain. As it turned out, ACC’s complaint had no substance and was motivated by Pullar embarrassing the corporation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. cows4me (248 comments) says:

    Crusher should sue Little’s hairy arsed butt all the way to the cleaners. Don’t settle for an apologie, make the socialist’s cough up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    “Silliness from Little”

    I thought this thread must have been about his aspirations to lead the Labour Party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Chuck Bird (4,661 comments) says:

    Hopefully, Collin’s sorts ACC out properly. That is wind it down. Pay those people up until then and let private industry take over expect for work related accidents as used to be the case. Whoever started this stupid scheme was totally incompetent.

    Why should the taxpayer pay for a drunk driver who injures himself and kills someone in the process? The bloody ACC has done about as much damage to the economy as the DPB on demand.

    When the ACC was introduced the proponents said other countries would soon follow. As far as I know not country has considered such as stupid idea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Positan (383 comments) says:

    It would appear certain that, on the strength of Little’s self-discrediting performances, his future as a “future leader of Labour,” let alone as an MP, would be very remote.

    Even Labour, the natural home of self-idolising morons and buffoons, couldn’t be that desperate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Positan

    Are you saying John Banks should join Labour?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Paulus (2,490 comments) says:

    Little by name Little by nature.
    Is Boag all pissed off because she is not longer a prima donna in the National Party, and cannot understand why she is not on thr invitation lists ? Her UTU.

    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.