Therefore her comments as Chairperson of the Fire Service Commission should be read as remarkable:

“I have worked with many different unions over the past 40 years including the Public Service Association, teachers, nurses and others. Over time they all earned my respect. I have the highest regard for firefighters as individuals and this was reinforced during their response to the Christchurch earthquakes. However, I despair that the NZPFU will ever lift its sights above narrow self interest and play a constructive and responsible role in reaching a fair wage agreement that properly reflects the prevailing circumstances.

The NZPFU has long been one of the more militant unions. The only thing they seem to hate more than capitalism is volunteer firefighters whom they regard as treasonable scum. There is a long history of threats and intimidation.

To have someone like Dame Margaret slam the union in this way, demonstrates how awful the union leadership is.  Their long-serving secretary, Derek Best, was Labour’s Ohariu candidate in 1999.

1. The only Region in the country to have failed to produce a water allocation plan, despite 19 years to do so
2. An out of control staff, who all but refused to accept the authority of Independent Planning Commissioners
3. A totally divided and dysfunctional Council
4. Rock bottom relations with the ten local territorial authorities, whose democratically elected Mayors had been lobbying the Government for years to do something

So they were sacked, just as Labour once sacked the Rodney District Council and Auckland Area Health Board. It is what happens when your incompetence continues on unchecked.

The major decisions before ECan are to do with water allocation. This is because ECan had failed to devise a plan, despite 19 years to do so. So who are the seven Commissioners? Are they ex National politicians (which ironically the sacked ECan Chair was). They are:

1. Dame Margaret Bazley, arguably NZ’s most respected public servant and problem solver
2. David Caygill, who was Helen Clark’s first Deputy Leader, and respected by all sides in politics. A former Christchurch Councillor who knows the region well.
3. David Bedford, Chair of Enterprise North Canterbury
4. Donald Couch, Lincoln Uni Pro-Chancellor with a long history in resource management and local govt, plus Ngai Tahu links
5. Tom Lambie,Chancellor of Lincoln University. Very experienced in water management issues. Former President of Fed Farmers. An organic farmer that produces organic milk
6. Peter Skelton, Environment Court Judge for 20 years, Associate Professor of Resource Management Law at Lincoln University
7. Rex Williams, Chancellor, Canterbury University, founder of environmental lobby group Water Rights Trust

So all up we have:

• four Commissioners with expert knowledge of water and resource management issues
• Two local university chancellors and a pro-chancellor
• A former labour party politician
• An environmentalist
• A organic farmer
• A business rep
• A Ngai Tahu link
• Dame Margaret as Chair

I look forward to them achieving in a couple of years what the Council failed to do in 19. And I doubt anyone can say that group is slanted politically.

Some will not want them to succeed. Certain urban fundamentalist environmentalists don’t want there to be a water allocation plan. They don’t want anyone taking any water. They don’t want farming or irrigation – to them it is all just pollution.

Environment Canterbury councillors have been given their marching orders by the Government and will be replaced by up to seven commissioners, possibly as soon as the start of May.

Government troubleshooter Dame Margaret Bazley has been appointed chairwoman of the commisioners, and the search is on for the remaining commission members.

ECan staff are being briefed on the sacking of the 14 elected councillors now, at the same time as Environment Minister Nick Smith and Local Government Minister Rodney Hide officially released their announcement.

For those who think this is all partisan politics, I would point out the ECan Chair who was just sacked is a former National MP.

A four person (not one person) review team concluded:

The Review Group acknowledges the significance of water and the complexities it brings to ECan in its management role.  However, the Group was struck by the ‘gap’ between ‘what needs to be done’ to appropriately manage water and ‘ECan’s capability to do so’.  The Review Group membership included some of New Zealand’s most experienced assessors of organisational capability.  In their experience they had not previously seen a gap between capability and requirement matching this particular situation.  In their view, the extent of the gap between the capability of ECan and what is required for it to adequately manage freshwater issues is enormous and unprecedented.

ECan was not just performing  bit below par. The capability gap was foudn to be “enormous and unprecedented”.

And this is not as simple as Wellington interfering. It is the elected local authority Mayors who called on the Government to intervene – something they had been calling for, for some years.

From time to time the Government has to appoint Commissioners, because a body is so dysfunctional. This happens to quite a few schools, has happened to a DHB, and in this case is happening to a Regional Council.

The choice of Dame Margaret is a shrewd one. She is 110% non-partisan, and has a excellent track record of sorting out dysfunctional systems.

The Government has said elections for ECan will be held by 2013 at the latest. This is the normal three year date. Obviously no elections later this year, but possibly in 2011 or 2012 if the problems get sorted out quickly.

The big challenge is to get a water plan in place – this is around 18 years overdue! Then water allocations will not be ad hoc.

The Q+A put out is very good. Especially the groups that called for change, which includes LGNZ, Ngai Tahu, Irrigation NZ, EDS, and the Mayors of Chch, Ashburton, Waitaki, Timaru, Mackenzie and Waimate.

My only criticism is putting the law change through under urgency. I see no reason it could not have a few weeks of submissions. However on the other hand, locals have had the chance to have input into both the review team, and to respond to the recommendations.

Even by her own straight-shooting standards, Dame Margaret Bazley came out with all guns blazing in her Legal Aid Review Report. …

The review, by any measure, is a stunning indictment of the legal profession.

Dame Margaret is one of the country’s top public servants, a former head of the Department of Social Welfare, and is no stranger to conducting such reviews.

Her inquiry of police conduct following the Louise Nicholas furore was similarly hard-hitting, if not quite so unconstrained in its vocabulary.

So it must be held that, as dramatic as it is, her choice of language is deliberate and reflects the gravity of the situation as she sees it.

What I find hilarious is Labour coming out saying how shocked they are, and demanding the Government act. These problems are not new.

The Herald says:

Last Friday, Dame Margaret Bazley produced her damning report on criminal legal aid. By Monday Justice Minister Simon Power had obtained the resignations of most of the administering board, the Legal Services Agency, and the Government decided that day to shut it down. We are not used to such dispatch.

Indeed. What happened to the days of reports gathering dust on book shelves? Simon Power is no ditherer.

And the Dom Post:

Dame Margaret’s report is remarkable for its language – reminiscent of her blunt 450-page report into police conduct, in 2007 – and implicit dismay that a system formed to assist the most vulnerable is operating so poorly, and being manipulated by colluding defendants and legal-aid lawyers. It is littered with references to “widespread abuse”, “taking backhanders”, “entrenched” positions, “poor relationships” and even, “should be disbarred”.

Government reports tend to be diplomatic in their language. The comments are remarkable. It is unfortunate that the wrong doers are spoiling it for the vast majority of legal aid lawyers who are responsible, and in fact take a pay cut when doing legal aid work. One of the solutions may be to pay more per hour for legal aid work, so it doesn’t attract the “bottom of the barrel” so to speak.

When this public servant – the term suits her so well – finally chooses to retire, she can do so knowing the profound effect she has had on the ethics of important parts of New Zealand life. She helped bring compassion to psychiatric hospitals, she redirected the efforts of social welfare agencies to work with entire families, she reformed the unionised nonsense that was the NZ Fire Service, and then administered a hefty kick to the New Zealand Police.

She might be hoping now, however, that she doesn’t need a legally aided defence lawyer in a hurry …

Heh indeed.

A damning review of legal aid says a sea change is needed to fix a system undermined by incompetent, unscrupulous and sometimes corrupt lawyers looking after their own interests.

The Legal Aid Review report released this morning recommended the Legal Services Agency, which administers the aid, lose its independent status and be folded into the Justice Ministry.

It said administrative costs were out of control and raised serious concerns about how the agency operated which had opened the system up to abuse by bad lawyers.

Wow that is much more damning and much more a radical solution than I expected. Some of the issues found:

* lawyers making sentencing submissions without having read the pre-sentence report;

* lawyers ignorant of legal principles and not realising their own ignorance;

* lawyers failing to turn up to court;

* “car boot lawyers” using a District Court law library phone as their office number and using interviewing rooms as their offices;

* lawyers gaming the system by delaying a plea or changing pleas part-way through the process to maximise payments – Dame Margaret said unverified sources believed up to 80 per cent of lawyers practising in Manukau District Court could be gaming the system;

* lawyers who demanded or accepted top up payments from clients who do not understand legal aid;

* widespread abuse of the preferred lawyer policy by duty solicitors, including taking backhanders for recommending particular lawyers to applicants.

I can’t imagine this report will just be filed somewhere to gather dust. Watch this space.

I regard this as an excellent appointment. Rennie is held in high regard in Wellington, and is a straight shooter. I can’t think of many people who would have a bad word to say about him. People who have worked with him also say he is very affable and approachable.

His appointment was recommended unanimously by a panel of Jim Bolger, Dame Margaret Bazley, Stan Rodger and David Parker. I think it was wise to not just have it done by the Minister. Hell, we may have ended up with Mike Williams as State Services Commissioner then