20 December 2012
Rennie should be disqualified from secretary appointment

State services commissioner Iain Rennie should consider his role in recent appointments and reflect on whether he is the appropriate person to be approving a new secretary for education.

PPTA president Robin Duff said that, in appointing Lesley Longstone, Rennie showed a lack of knowledge or interest in what the public wanted for education.

“He was unable to step outside of his own narrow political ideology and has effectively disqualified himself from being able to make a better appointment.”

Duff felt the ministry would have its work cut out for it finding someone willing to put their reputation on the line by taking on the role with the current minister of education still in place.

“More than anybody we want to see this position filled by a competent and confident candidate, but who is going to take the career-crushing step of trying to work with an aloof and autocratic minister who cannot connect with ordinary New Zealanders?” he said.

Rennie needed to get out and talk to people within the education sector if he hoped to make a successful appointment, Duff said.

“PPTA would welcome the chance to meet with him and talk through some of the real issues facing education.”

© Scoop Media

Arguably Reassuring: Inspector-General Finds GCSB "Arguably" Legal

Of the 88 individuals:

• 15 cases involving 22 individuals did not have any information intercepted by GCSB.

• another four cases involving five individuals were the subjects of a New Zealand Security Intelligence Service warrant and the GCSB assisted in the execution of the warrants. The Inspector-General is of the view that there were arguably no breaches and the law is unclear.

• the Bureau only provided technical assistance which did not involve interception of communications, involving three of the individuals, so no breach occurred.

• the remaining cases involved the collection of metadata, and the Inspector-General formed the view that there had arguably been no breach, noting once again that the law is unclear.
More>>