Huge conflict of interest has been exposed by Newsroom. The public service scum who has called for the investigation of corporate spies, also used those corporate spies!
An ironic case of foxes and henhouses
The Government’s spooks and snoops have obviously been getting a bit cocky. But the announcement to investigate their use by government departments is highly ironic.
Because the guy calling the inquiry, State Services Commissioner Peter Hughes, was in charge of MSD when it was using private investigators. Particularly in court cases where the state was on the hook for serious liability. Like, say, when children in state care have been raped.
Hughes was the boss at MSD when the Crown defended the White case in 2007. The civil case was about many things but it was essentially a test case about the Crown’s liability for abuse of children in state welfare institutions. Crown Law and MSD chucked millions of dollars at defending it because they knew if they lost there were thousands of other victims they’d be paying out substantial damages to.
The Crown won on statute of limitations, although the judge accepted the allegations of sexual abuse by one of the main plaintiffs. This judgment set the precedent the Crown wanted and allowed the state to pay negligible amounts to claimants on terms that suited the Crown’s budget. If victims don’t like what they are offered, their only option is to go through the invasive interrogation of a QC acting for the Crown in a court, with little to no chance of winning. Despite a Royal Commission of Inquiry that’s still their only option.
The case received no media coverage, probably because of heavy suppression orders. But there were all sorts of details that didn’t appear in the proceedings.
…MSD HAD to win the 2007 case because they had been using so many corporate spies and mass surveillance powers in so many other cases, if they lost the 2007 case, it would have exposed them to multi-millions in damages.
So the person who was deeply involved in using corporate spies, is now all of a sudden reviewing what those corporate spies have been doing.
Was that out of a sense of duty to get to the bottom of corporate spy use by the State, or was that to ensure what was revealed wouldn’t expose their previous use of those corporate spies?
After seeing how Housing NZ destroyed lives based on a myth, after seeing MSD attempt to imprison and damage beneficiaries by defining loans as income, after seeing the cruelty of the state in dealing with the most vulnerable amongst us time after time after time – learning public service scum who controversially used corporate spies is now investigating the use of those corporate spies should be a final straw.
The Left look at the State as the great leveller of unregulated Capitalism, but what if the State is part the bloody problem in crucifying the poorest and weakest amongst us?
The neoliberal revolution that occurred in NZ changed our public services from being the instruments that facilitated egalitarianism into psychotic corporations focused on making rather than doing. The neoliberal welfare State is there to punish and damage, it is not there to look after the welfare of those people.
The radical Left needs to consider targeting the State for an existential change.
I look at the spinelessness and gutlessness of the Labour Party and the Greens in power so far and I wonder at how a new populist, militant movement could be established to force real change. I see an army of beneficiaries who have been abused by the state and who the Greens and Labour are too frightened to stand up for in case it annoys the PSA.
Imagine if someone created a radically militant response to these public service scum, how many tens of thousands who have been abused by this system would rally to a far more radical agenda than the weak one being pushed by the current political spectrum?
I think Ross Meurant was onto something when he spoke to the gangs about political engagement. What if prisoner rights merged with beneficiary rights and a militant political expression of contempt for a public service that no longer serves the public but the elites?