The comment stream

Join the Interest community to be a registered commenter so you can:
- Edit your comments
- Avoid the CAPTCHA
- Vote on comments
Register Here

Already registered? log back in here ..

Forgotten your password? No problem! Click here

Finance sector jobs

Senior Liability Underwriting Manager
Lead from the front utilising your strategic, technical and leadership qualities within th...more
New Zealand
Senior Liability Product Underwriter - Product Management
Lead from the front utilising your technical expertise in this highly attractive senior li...more
New Zealand
High Performing Senior Liability UnderwriterHigh Performing Senior Liability Underwriter
Customer focus, high performance, exceeding client expectations and achieving profitable g...more
New Zealand
Manager Operational Effectiveness and Assurance IT
Reporting to the Senior Manager Operational Risk Effectiveness and Assurance, the key focu...more
New Zealand
efinancialcareers.com

Reader poll

Should you fix your mortgage now or stay floating?

Choices

Opinion: Why didn't Treasury and RBNZ fight back?

Posted in News

David Farrar at Kiwiblog makes some excellent points about why supposedly impartial and robust public servants at the Treasury and the Reserve Bank appeared to let the deeply flawed Bank Deposit Guarantee scheme emerge into the sunlight with so many problems and without consulting the opposition.

Did Bollard and Whitehead advocate for bipartisan consultation, and if so why did they not insist on it? Would consulting with the two people who might be Prime Minister and Finance Minister in less than a month have detracted from economic stability and constitutional integrity or enhanced it? Think of what a disaster it would have been if the Government announced the scheme and the Opposition then did not back it? The result would have been worse than never announcing the scheme in the first place. I say this with great hesitation and respect for the Governor and Secretary. But their actions have undermined confidence in a neutral public service. To not insist on consultation with the Opposition for a $150 billion guarantee, just four weeks before an election, was misguided at best, and reckless at worst.

David is right on the money here.  

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment in the box on the right or click on the "'Register" link at the bottom of the comments. Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making these comments.

2 Comments

This definately stinks of dirty

This definately stinks of dirty politics. By wanting to appear one step ahead of the oposition labour really did undermine our entire political system. How can they justify making a $150 billion decision without as much as consulting with anyone outside their own political party.

Helen Clark claims this election is all about trust. I ask you, how can we trust a party that deliberately undermines their closest competition in order to make themselves look good?

It is dirty tricks like this that really makes you wonder if our political system is flawed

off topic - but I

off topic - but I think it's amusing this election is about 'trust', and all of the billboards around town with Helen Clarks' face have photoshop'd teeth.. her teeth aren't white, nor straight.. why all these lies... lies I tell you..