By Cranmer

The Prime Minister’s claim that they disclose “every single person that we meet with” is demonstrably false. Rather than misleading the public, Ardern should adopt these sensible precaution.

Last week Jacinda Ardern achieved the rare political feat of finding herself offside with her mentor Helen Clark, the National and Green parties and a slew of commentators from across the political spectrum, all of whom were united in their calls for a cooling-off period for Crown Ministers between the time that they leave Government and before they become a lobbyist.

Such a united front is understandable when you consider that most democratic countries have adopted similar, sensible restrictions. This shouldn’t be that controversial a topic. By instituting a cooling-off period Ardern would merely be following international best practice on a matter of compliance and good governance (albeit belatedly).

Should be “cooling off period for political insiders after leaving taxpayer-funded positions before becoming lobbyists.” @anticorruption recommends minimum 2 years. Australia & EU have 18 months; USA & UK 2 years; Canada: 5 years. @opengovpart @kiriallan https://t.co/2TpKWTJtCA

— Helen Clark (@HelenClarkNZ) October 7, 2022

 

Despite the outcry the Prime Minister told Morning Report on Monday there was no need for change.

“Every New Zealander knows our policies by our manifesto,” Ardern said.

“What’s important is transparency. Ministers, when they meet … we report through our pro-active diary release every single person that we meet with, we report on what subjects we meet with [them about].

“It is not voluntary – it must be reported as part of our official information Act proactive releases, which we’ve been doing since we’ve been in government.” – Morning report

Even on face value the proactive release of ministerial diaries seems like a poor substitute for proper regulation of political lobbying but on closer inspection Ardern’s claims totally fall apart.

On each Ministerial page of the Government’s Beehive website is a lengthy disclaimer that relates specifically to their diaries. It includes the following statements:

“It may include meetings which were in the diary but did not eventuate or were placeholders, and may not include unscheduled meetings. Where the portfolio to which a meeting relates is indicated, please note that it is possible material in another portfolio area could also have been covered during the meeting. Please also note attendees to a meeting change frequently so this table may not contain an accurate record of all attendees.”

When you look at how the Cabinet actually handles its disclosure obligations, it’s even worse. Remember on Monday the Prime Minister described these obligations as “not voluntary”. In relation to timing, Cabinet has agreed that ministerial diaries should be released within 15 business days of the end of each month.

Cranmer’s Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

In February 2021, National’s Chris Bishop asked Minister Mahuta why she hadn’t released any diaries for October 2020, November 2020, December 2020 and January 2021. The Minister’s excuse? An issue with uploading to the website.

In June 2021, Chris Luxon asked Minister Mahuta why her April diary hadn’t been released yet. The excuse this time? An administrative oversight caused by staff changeover.

When you look at the dairy entries themselves there are numerous errors and inconsistencies. For instance, Minister Mahuta’s diary records a meeting on 19 May 2020 at 8:30pm with Minister Davis. The corresponding entry doesn’t appear in Davis’s diary. Likewise on 14 April 2022, Minister Woods’s diary records a meeting with, amongst others, Minister Mahuta. The corresponding entry doesn’t appear in Mahuta’s diary.

On 5 October 2020 Minister Mahuta had a one-on-one meeting with the Chief Executive of the Ministry for the Environment. When asked what was discussed in that meeting and if there was an agenda, notes from the meeting, or any follow-up actions, the Minister replied that it was “a last catch-up meeting for that parliamentary term” – no written material was available.

Of more concern are some of the omissions in Minister Mahuta’s diary. On 21 April 2022 Mahuta listed a meeting in her diary with “Taumata Arowai Board Chair”. When asked by National’s Simeon Brown if anyone else was present at the meeting, Mahuta replied that it included government officials and her sister, Tipa Mahuta, the Chair of the Maori Advisory Group (Te Puna) within Taumata Arowai. That is clearly a significant omission because the appointment of Tipa Mahuta and her on-going professional interactions with her sister, the Minister, has attracted criticism due to its inherent conflict with personal and professional relationships.

When the Minister was asked why her diary omitted to state that she had met with her sister, Tipa Mahuta, in her capacity as Chair of Te Puna, the Minister replied:

The pro-active diary release is not intended to be an exhaustive list of meeting attendees.”

Thus when the Prime Minister appears on Morning Report and categorically states “we report through our pro-active diary release every single person that we meet with” she is intentionally misleading the country. The diaries are released for general information purposes only. In fact the disclaimer of the Government’s website is very clear that no reliance can be placed on them for any purpose let alone as a method of policing the lobbying activities of former Cabinet Ministers with their former colleagues.

The information provided is for general informational purposes only. While we try to keep the information up-to-date and correct, there are no guarantees, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy or reliability of this information.”

Ardern has history with diary omissions in her Cabinet. In 2018 Clare Curran was sacked from Cabinet and stripped of her open government portfolio after not disclosing a meeting set up using her personal email account. It was held at 8pm in Curran’s Beehive office with nobody else present, and was not put in her diary. The next month Curran responded to a written question from National but failed to disclose the meeting.

In truth there needs to be a comprehensive strengthening of rules relating to lobbying, conflicts, procurement and anti-corruption. Some of this may be addressed via the Public Service Commissioner’s review of Mahuta family contracts with government agencies but it seems that it will take a scandal to bounce this feckless Prime Minister into overdue reforms of ministerial conduct unless the voting public has its say first.