Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Academic journals use blind peer reviews. But they're interested in academic quality, not natural justice.
Exactly my point, I/S, and you'd think O'Sullivan would be aware of the distinction. Then again, I do grind my teeth whenever she uses 'refute' as an synonym for deny.
-
Sure. Let's just say he exercised his right to have the report reviewed by a a QC, then. I hold no brief for Hausmann -- he might be a right royal bastard for all I know -- and it doesn't really alter my point.
And a reasonable one it was too. But I'd like to think someone who's been around as long as O'Sullivan would have a slightly better ear for the connotations of a phrase like 'peer review'. God knows in Hausmann's position, I wouldn't be retaining a high profile legal beagle like Hugh Rennie to do anything less than turn his keen legal mind to poking every hole in the damn report he could find, and making those holes as large as possible.
In the end, I think there's a lot of spin, counter-spin, pre-emptive strikes and (from gossip I've heard) personal shit between all the players in this that leaves nobody with their dignity intact.
-
Hausmann, like the other parties to the dispute, had the opportunity to review the draft, claimed it was "factually incorrect in several key areas" and had it peer-reviewed by a QC.
And just to get nit-picky, Russell, I wonder if 'peer-review' (a term which bears connotations of disinterested academic scrutiny) was the best choice of words.
Here's how Fran O'Sullivan used the term:
The Herald on Sunday understands that Hausmann and Healthcare NZ strongly contested the initial draft, claiming that it was factually incorrect in several key areas.
Hausmann's legal firm, Russell McVeagh, had the initial report peer reviewed by Wellington Queen's Counsel Hugh Rennie.
In the context of a drug trial, I think any academic journal would not publish on the basis of a peer review commissioned either by a pharmaceutical company with a very direct interest in publication.
-
To be fair, I hardly think that it's Tom who has made this dispute into a political issue ...
No, but I don't think nutting off about some filthy "right wing exceptionalism" is much use either. As I said earlier, the public health system runs through vast amounts of public money every year, and I'd like to know that no DHB is handing out multi-million dollar contracts on the basis of cronyism and patronage, and that all conflicts of interest (which may well be inevitable in a country as small as New Zealand) are properly disclosed and managed.
-
It seemed unlikely to me that a man as ambitious as David Cunliffe would hitch his ministerial career to a brutal act of "utu" (as Ralston had it) if he knew there was an independent review of disputes around the board coming that would leave him thoroughly exposed only weeks later.
You seem to be operating under the misconception that politicians always operate on the basis of rational self-interest. :) A smart political operator might just come to the conclusion that any report would be complex enough - and cast enough criticism in all directions -- that you could cherry pick the best bits to spin, and most people would get bored and move on before any real damage is done. Seems to work well enough, enough of the time to be a viable strategy. Especially in health where the media isn't all that interested unless there's a corpse or two surrounded by particularly photogenic mourners.
-
The extra twist of bitterness comes from an extraordinarily poisoned right wing exceptionalism that has seeped into every nook and cranny of this particular sleepy hollow, if you don't believe me just check the editorials in the back issues of Hawkes Bay Today.
Tom: Perhaps we could forget its election year for a moment, and consider that vote health chews though an eye-watering amount of public money, and we might all have an interest in making sure that it's not a trough for cronyism and outright corruption. I'll tell you this from experience, Tom, when your partner is on an operating table with his chest open the politics of health can go get fucked.
-
But I see very little criticism of Clinton based on her policies, rather it's she's supposedly divisive, she'll cause the Dems to lose etc.
Well, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on the first part of that -- because after running the '3 am' ad, I think the MSM has been running a healthily sceptical reality check on her own claims of foreign affairs expertise. I just don't think the Clinton camp can have it both ways: Does anyone seriously want to argue that if Geraldine Ferraro was a proxy for the McCain campaign, and a Republican vice-presidential nominee, her comments wouldn't have been explicitly condemned as racist dog-whistling?
-
No, but does it make for efficient government if senior management is ideologically opposed to the policy direction that has been decided upon by the elected government.
Well, considering that the whole point of an apolitical civil service is the provision of free and frank advice which the Government is under no obligation to accept it might be rather useful. As long as your hypothetical senior manager also remembers it is their ultimate obigation to implement government policy whether they personally agree with it or not.
If National wins the next election, I'm sure the resignations of any senior civil servant who cannot do so will be accepted with regret. I'd just strongly suggest John Key not waste any time trying to sniff out ideological deviationalism.
The private sector doesn't do this - you don't see Microsoft hiring Richard Stallman or Body Shop employing Donald Rumsfeld, do you?
No, instead in the United States we see the horror show of a whole tier of the civil service being political appointees -- which, I think, any fair-minded observer would say was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be something of a mixed bag.
-
It was not so much her dangly bits that were so offensive, but her politics--which have become more overt in recent months.
You do wish folk like her would go away forever.
Really, Geoff? First, I'd make the observation that "in recent months" Rankin has been a private citizen, and I assume doesn't actually have any obligation to follow the State Sector Code of Conduct.
And considering that the Madeline Setchell shit storm has cost one Minister and one Chief Executive their careers, I do hope you're not coming out of the closet as an advocate of ideological purges of the civil service every time there's a change of government. Now that would be a damn sight more worthy of outrage than the orgy of nappy-filling going on because that nasty John Key used the b-word.
-
Of course, you don't hear about that side of things from the National Party.
Yeah, Kotare, and nine years ago you could be forgiven for thinking WINZ staff spent all their time jetting around the country with Christine Rankin buying gaudy ear-bobs.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 … 1235 Older→ First