MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

The Rot of Secrecy Now Spreads Through Tax Funded Departments

Filed under: General,Law & Courts — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 11:02 am Thu 26th November 2015

Government organisations we pay for are becoming increasingly secretive and controlling over information about their activities. The latest example was highlighted in this week’s media reports about our Police demanding that researchers sign onerous contracts before Police will release information. Those contracts give Police the right to control and censor what those researchers write, and Police assume the right to ‘blacklist’ any researcher who doesn’t sign the contract or who breaches it in any way.

Another example was reported on last week after media company NZME ran a 24-hour ‘Flagathon’ on two radio stations also involving the NZ Herald. The Key government’s ‘Flag Consideration Panel’ paid some amount to enable this Flagathon to take place but both the Panel and NZME refused to disclose how much this was, citing ‘commercial sensitivity’ and smugly behaving as if this closed the matter. This is unacceptable. We the NZ taxpayers are paying for the service but are being told we aren’t allowed to know how much! How can a democratic process enable its voters to exercise some control and accountability over government if they are denied basic information about the activities and spending of government agencies? The amount is important. If it seems excessive then the taxpayers will want to know whether (e.g.) someone on the Flag Consideration Panel had a personal or business relationship with someone in NZME.

If a private company contracts to provide product or services to government then it should assume the government’s funders and shareholders, i.e. we the taxpayers, will be told the details. The degree of commercial secrecy possible between two private commercial companies will be significantly reduced when taxpayer’s money is involved. There may be justification for withholding economic details during a tendering process but in the case of the Flagathon it was a done deal and OUR money had already been spent.

It seems to us that prior to the advent of our Femily Court, government organizations were much more accountable to the voters who funded them. The only exceptions were a few agencies related to national security such as military and secret service, this having been so throughout civilization and since the advent of democracy. Other government services were required to disclose information and if there were evidence of overspending or any hint of corruption, the relevant minister could expect to be sacked. But then the Femily Court was invented and was given the right to operate in secret. This seems to have been the thin edge of a wedge and we now see the anti-democratic rot of official secrecy spreading widely across government agencies.

This rot has been promoted by successive governments through an increasing trend of contracting out taxpayer-funded services, thereby placing government at arm’s length from accountability. We are seeing this with private prison operator Serco. When things go seriously wrong now the government department and its minister are protected from accountability, conveniently able to shift this on to the contractor. Corrections and its minister are currently making a big show of blaming Serco, distracting the population from remembering that the department and its minister are ultimately responsible for the welfare of those imprisoned by the state.

One might venture the sacrilegious suggestion that reduced accountability by government agencies has been related to increased feminist participation in society and government. As many here have experienced, women with feminist leanings are notoriously reluctant to have their behaviour scrutinized or to acknowledge / take real responsibility for any wrongdoing they have committed. The Femily Court was designed largely to promote feminist power and wealth, in a level of secrecy that mirrors feminist tactics in general. Such rot is spreading. Time to apply the Borax.


  1. What needs to be read along side this, is the way Police obtain other research from overseas.

    They use biased and badly researched studies, cherry picked from overseas police jurisdictions, to justify Police policies.

    When you look at what studies Police are basing their policy decisions on and what and who they are branding inappropriate in New Zealand, you can see the Police have become a highly politicised, fanatical, organisation far removed from the social function they are intended to perform.

    The outcome of this, is that the Police are allowed to continue to operate in our society, based on fictional academic authority, while they are actively censoring and undermining the academic quality of our own research in New Zealand.

    I don’t like to use emotive words like Stasi, but that’s the direction this organisation is heading in.

    It’s high time the Commissioner’s Office was subject to an inquiry to find out just who is running this ship, because it sure as hell isn’t the guy at the top.

    Comment by Downunder — Thu 26th November 2015 @ 2:40 pm

  2. Thanks MoMA, for raising this issue. The problems appear to have started under Labour and since then National have made the rot far worse.

    A few months ago, I attended the PAG Poverty Action Group seminar about poverty in present day NZ. A previous Government Statistician (I cannot recall his name) pointed out the extent to which Government Departments worked to fail to honour the Official Information Act. He gave examples of:

    never finalising reports and refusing to release drafts (Illegal but difficult to fight, as they then pose the cost to “finalise” the report as a barrier to be paid by the information requester)
    denying that they held information and offering to collate it at an inordinately high cost
    claiming privileged advice, when the information was used to obtain priviledged advice, but wasn’t itself privileged (this is an old legal dog, used for illegally dodging legal discovery)

    These attitudes of contempt towards statute law seriously threaten the performance and quality of democracy and justice in NZ.

    They ease in corruption and unethical behaviour, which are the very reasons the Official Information Act was passed in the first place. I would suggest that the consequences of corruption in NZ, costs more lives than car accidents, police chases, police assaults, suicide, industrial accidents, medical “misadventure” and employing too many women teachers combined.

    All of this has a long history in NZ and hasn’t been properly resolved yet. Time for major changes at the top.

    Contempt of Caught? Where did the honour go?

    Accountability that was never really intended to work

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Fri 27th November 2015 @ 9:44 am

  3. Banned academic sparks policy change

    Police have apologised to “censored” gang researcher Dr Jarrod Gilbert after he was deemed unfit to conduct research and banned from accessing basic police data due to his gang links.

    In a statement issued on Monday, Police strategy deputy chief executive Mark Evans said matters raised by Gilbert in relation to a research application made by the company Independent Research Solutions in 2014 had been reviewed.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 30th November 2015 @ 5:54 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar