Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search

 

Gordon Campbell on the latest McCully fiasco

Gordon Campbell on the latest McCully fiasco

First published on Werewolf

It is 2008. A victorious John Key finds he’s inherited from the Clark government the vexing problem of a well-connected Saudi called Sheikh Hmood Al Ali Al Khalaf who seems utterly enraged that New Zealand has curtailed (for humanitarian reasons!) the live sheep trade that he’d invested in, and which had been shaping up as a good little earner for him. What to do? Thank goodness that someone in Cabinet has put their hand up. Hmmm. The solution on offer seems to be a black ops exercise run by Murray McCully, without most of his Cabinet colleagues or the public having the foggiest idea about what he might be up to. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, as Auditor-General Lynn Provost has just found in her long-awaited report into the Saudi sheep deal: plenty.

True, she found no evidence of bribery or corruption – and to be fair to McCully, there doesn’t seem to be any evidence in Provost’s report of copyright infringement or grand theft auto, either. What there does seem to be is evidence of what the A-G delicately calls “unacceptable” behaviours –whereby for instance, the process of placating this particular Saudi (while plumping up the cushions for a free trade deal with the Saudi kingdom in general) was deliberately disguised as a contract for services rendered. Here’s a sampling of McCully’s shortcomings in briefing Cabinet about his gambit :

The Minister of Foreign Affairs put a paper to Cabinet outlining the proposed arrangement with the Al Khalaf Group in February 2013…... I found some significant shortcomings in the Cabinet paper, including that it:

did not clearly explain that the Al Khalaf Group would own the goods and services costing the New Zealand Government $6 million;

did not identify how the $10 million figure was arrived at (a figure that has since risen to $11.5 million);

signalled the risk of a claim against the Government based only on the $20-$30 million figure that the Cabinet paper said was suggested by the Al Khalaf Group (there was no assessment by Ministry officials of the substance of that legal risk);

did not include any analysis about whether there were any other potential obstacles to the signing or ratification of the free trade agreement, apart from the concerns of the Al Khalaf Group about the export of live sheep or the assertion by the Gulf Cooperation Council that this was the only obstacle to the free trade agreement; and

identified that New Zealand exports could double to $3 billion in five years if a free trade agreement was signed with the Gulf Cooperation Council, without including any analysis.

Based on these significant shortcomings, I am concerned at the lack of robust analysis and the quality of information that was provided to Cabinet on this matter.

Clearly, no blame to the Minister for gaining Cabinet approval on dubious terms, nothing to see, lets move on. As we now know, the Saudi sheikh got a sizeable cash payment and a “model” sheep farm gifted to him by the New Zealand taxpayer, and the sheep involved promptly died in the desert. (So our humanitarian-motivated ban on live sheep exports turned out well, didn’t it?)

In her report, Provost makes a distinction between this payoff for “services” (not good, not well flagged, but legal) and a “bribe “(bad) or a “facilitation” payment (also bad) whereby money changes hands to get quicker access to a nominated service. In this case, the relatively diffuse goal was a free trade deal, which apparently - if you're a Jesuit used to making these sort of fine distinctions - did not quite put McCully’s gambit into the category of being a bribe, or a facilitation payment. Ultimately then…has the noble end (a free trade deal with Riyadh!) justified the goofy, costly and somewhat dodgy means that were deployed? Well, Provost has asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to provide a totting up of the current state of the cost/benefit ratio, over the next few months.

For now though….McCully appears to have survived another round of mishaps, mismanagement and shoddy practices. Once again it will be his officials who will have to (somehow) rationalize what has been made/allowed to happen on his watch. There is now quite a roster of such events, stretching back to the Tourism Board scandal of the late 1990s and including – more recently - the bungled reforms at MFAT, the Malaysian diplomat immunity scandal, and now this. Clearly, any problem where the answer is ‘Better Call Murray’ is never going to be anxiety free, is likely to end badly, and will probably inflict collateral damage among any officials caught standing too close to this Minister when the explosion eventually, inevitably, happens.

If I can mix my TV and film analogies, MFAT under McCully is less like Better Call Saul and probably more akin to The Hurt Locker…in that the Ministry seems to have become a place where bombs (many of the Minister’s making) are always going to be in need of being defused, in conditions where only the MFAT officials caught in the immediate blast area will suffer any career harm.

Theme song

And here’s Nat Cole, with what could be this Minister’s theme song…in that there’s always going to be room to blame someone else, or something else, for landing him in another fine mess.

Which segues fairly well into this compendium of ordinary life at MFAT….with subtitles, too.

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Binoy Kampmark: The Maybe Mob And The Rushdie Attack
He has survived death threats and attempts on his life since February 1989. But Salman Rushdie’s luck just about ran out at the Chautauqua Institution, southwest of Buffalo in New York State. On August 12, at a venue historically celebrated for bringing education to all, the writer was stabbed incessantly by a fanatic who felt little sense of guilt or remorse. Hadi Matar only had eyes for Rushdie’s neck and abdomen. As a result of the attack, the author is likely to lose sight of one eye and possibly the use of an arm... More>>



Binoy Kampmark: A Looting Matter: Cambodia’s Stolen Antiquities

Cambodia has often featured in the Western imagination as a place of plunder and pilfering. Temples and artefacts of exquisite beauty have exercised the interest of adventurers and buccaneers who looted with almost kleptocratic tendency. In 1924, the French novelist and future statesman André Malraux, proved himself one of Europe’s greatest adventurers in making off with a ton of sacred stones from Angkor Wat... More>>

Dunne Speaks: Labour Leadership Speculation Premature And Facile
Speculation that the Prime Minister’s leadership of the Labour Party may be at risk because of this week’s adverse poll results is as exaggerated as it is premature and facile. While her popularity has plummeted from the artificially stellar heights of a couple of years ago and is probably set to fall further to what would be a more realistic assessment... More>>



Ian Powell: Colossal ‘Porkies’ And Band-aids Don’t Make A Health Workforce Plan

On 1 August Minister of Health Andrew Little announced what he described as the start of a plan for the beleaguered workforce in Aotearoa New Zealand’s health system: Government’s 5 year late health workforce announcement. In October 2017, when Labour became government with its two coalition parties, it inherited a health workforce crisis from the previous National-led government... More>>


Binoy Kampmark: The Fuss About Monkeypox
The World Health Organization has been one of the easier bodies to abuse. For parochial types, populist moaners and critics of international institutions, the WHO bore the brunt of criticisms from Donald Trump to Jair Bolsonaro. Being a key institution in identifying public health risks, it took time assessing the threat posed by SARS-CoV-2 and its disease, COVID-19... More>>

Dunne Speaks: Time For MPs To Think For Themselves
One of the more frequently quoted statements of the Irish statesman and philosopher, Edmund Burke, was his observation that “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement, and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”... More>>