Adam posted a brief comment late yesterday re the Immigration Scandal and the resignation of Mary Anne Thompson. He was busy most of yesterday with various meetings. Today is some what similar, but he thought he would try for a round-up on the Thompson/Immigration saga.
Adam assumes that readers are up with the story so far, so he will go straight in. First up there was this NZPA item on Stuff late yesterday, this was the link in my update number 6, erroneously titled number 5 until a reader pointed out my error,:-
The National Party says the resignation of besieged Immigration Service head Mary-Anne Thompson is not the end of the affair and many questions remain unanswered.
Her boss Labour Department chief executive Christopher Blake announced today that Dr Thompson’s last day had been yesterday, she would not work notice and would receive her legal entitlements under her contract.
It would be worth someone seeking to establish what pay-off if any Ms Thompson may receive, because if she is guilty of misconduct why is she allowed to resign and receive contractual entitlements, rather than be fired for cause? Presumably with no payout!
Then Mr Blake used the usual form of words:-
“In the interests of the department and the wider public service, Ms Thompson has decided to resign from her position,” Mr Blake said.
In an internal email, Mr Blake told staff he hoped the resignation would bring an end to the matter but warned them not to talk to the media.
“While this decision brings a degree of closure to these matters, I expect public scrutiny will continue around this and wider organisational issues,” he said.
“I will be making no further public comment about the resignation, and I remind you to refrain from making any comment or speculation on this matter to persons outside the department, especially to journalists.”
Why on earth should Blake think the resignation will bring an end to the matter.
There are many grave questions requiring an answer, as set out in Adam’s extensive earlier posts on this matter:-
- not just about the actions of MS Thompson, but
- in respect of the Immigration Service,
- the Labour Department,
- other staff,
- as well the actions of those whom Ms Mary Anne Thompson reported to.
Does Blake think that by allowing Ms Thompson to resign the matter can be sanitised and effectively swept under the metaphorical carpet.?
If so he, Blake, is very much mistaken. These questions and issues must be addressed by a robust inquiry, as Adam has previously called for.
Adam thoroughly approves of the comments from Lockwood Smith as noted below:-
National’s immigration spokesman Lockwood Smith said Mr Blake was mistaken if he thought the resignation brought any closure.
“Labour has still not answered any key questions in relation to those allegations, and the subsequent departmental cover up,” Dr Smith said.
Dr Smith further commented:-
Dr Smith said immigration ministers - past and present - should say when they found our about the issue.
He said the current minister Clayton Cosgrove had dismissed the issue as an operational matter.
“The reality is the first inquiry implicated other managers, and revealed a culture where staff have come under pressure to approve immigrations applications that fall outside the rules,” Dr Smith said.
Unless ministers answered questions about the issues, confidence in the service would still be compromised.
Minister Cosgrove is not commenting saying this is outside his purview, in Adam’s view he is staying quiet until he sees which way the wind is blowing. Mr Cosgrove is ambitious and Adam suspects he wants to read the political runes before he takes any public action or makes any public announcement.
Former Immigration Minister Aussie Malcolm told Radio Live that the issue was not with officers in the service, but senior staff.
“The Immigration Service is the people that produced officers who said `no, we don’t want to do this, it’s wrong’.”
“The Immigration Service is the organisation which has been seething with discontent over this problem. They know it’s not right, and they don’t like it.”
It was not corruption in the legal sense.
“This is the old Biblical corruption where power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, it’s not corruption in the sense that money changed hands…it’s simply inappropriate action by a boss.
“A person in this position doesn’t do what she did.”
Quite right she should not have done it.
Now this is but one element in the story. There are a number of others, but work calls so Adam will resume his comments later in another post.
On a tangential point, it is interesting to see Lord Acton’s dictum given the status of a Biblical quote.
The complete quote is here for those interested:-
“I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption, it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”
It is the emphasised words which are most often quoted today. Acton wrote his dictum in response to the promulgation of papal infallibility of which he was no fan, though an influential Catholic layman himself.
The sentiment is however as relevant today in the context of any person, especially one in the privileged position of being in a leading governance position, e.g. a politician, particularly one who is seen by many as being overweening, or a public servant such as Mary Anne Thompson in this case.
Adam’s previous posts on this matter are listed here:
Immigration Scandal
Update 1
Update 2
Update 3
Update 4
Update 5
Update 6 (essentially a note of an event - not a detailed comment)
