KEY POINTS:
Stand by for a turnover of Government boards and commissions if National is the lead party in Government after November 8.
This would be for two main reasons: to undo political appointments by Labour and its allies and to implement regulatory changes, particularly in electricity and telecommunications.
A sprawling array of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and other Government companies, independent regulatory commissions, semi-autonomous Crown entities and Crown agencies conducts much of the Government's business. Then there are myriad advisory boards and committees. The Government appoints their boards and commissions.
Many appointees are chosen, on outside advice, for their specialist skills.
But the posts are also a useful means of patronage to friends, supporters, party hacks and (re-)tired MPs. Labour president Mike Williams in effect draws his stipend not from the party but from his several appointments. As this year's campaign period approached, the Cabinet made swags of appointments - and National said it should have been consulted so close to an election.
Some political appointees do have relevant skills: Williams was successful in business, for example. And most boards - exceptions are SOEs, which are supposed to operate strictly commercially, and the Securities and Commerce Commissions, which must be fully independent of ministers - find it useful to have insider knowledge of how Wellington works, and a pipeline into the Cabinet.
But the Labour-led Governments have had another motive for some appointments: eyes and ears to ensure that boards are in tune with the Government's objectives.
National acknowledges that many post-1999 appointments have merit - and, of course, it would make political appointments, including of small-party supporters. But it insists that it would treat SOEs, commissions and boards more at arm's length. It proposes to use the fire-at-will capacity it believes Labour has introduced to clean out the more overtly political appointees.
National's policy is also for a more generic approach to competition and regulation policy in most cases, by contrast with the more prescriptive approach that has developed since 1999.
Thus a National-led Government would alter telecommunications regulation. It would also "review" the role of the Electricity Commission. Senior National MPs think some changes made since 1999 work well but disapprove of ministers' capacity to issue directions, so want to fold the Electricity Commission back into the independent Commerce Commission - though they might in the end be persuaded not to.
National is also set to split the Commerce Commission's regulatory and enforcement functions. That would mean changes to the personnel but exactly who and how is for after the election.
The party has criticised the Tertiary Education Commission as too bureaucratic. But senior MPs say it has a new CEO and relatively new chair and should be given time to explain itself. Colin James
colinjames@synapsis.co.nz
www.colinjames.co.nz
