What If We Ranked Government Ministers by the Ethical Standards of their Ministries?
Jordan Kelly • 13 May 2025

There's A Whole Different Way to Conduct Polls & Opinion-Gathering that Deserves Investigating

So there's this small but growing  (but still small, viz a viz the size of the New Zealand market)  YouTube-based news channel hosted by a former Parliamentary press gallery journo, Duncan Garner. Tonight, he ran a segment in which he ranked the "10 Best Ministers" in the country's Cabinet.


But it occurred to me that his rankings were based in part on "results" (and whether he agreed with the desirability of those results or not) and in part on (as I saw it) public optics. How well the various portfolio holders came across in the theatre that is New Zealand politics.


I want to propose an alternative (radical but shouldn't be) method of ranking those with whom the buck supposedly stops for the performance and ethics of Ministries, Departments, Bureaus and Agencies in this country. I propose that, "We, the People" rank these "Honourable" individuals based on the actual "honourability" of the organisations bearing the name of their portfolios.


I know they'd scream in protest, saying that Ministers have no jurisdiction over the operations of their Ministries - but at the end of the day, that's a total cop-out. And I'm not sure at what point in the last few decades that cop-out got introduced - but when I was a Ministerial Press Secretary, I can tell you that NO head of a Department wanted to arrive in of a morning and find a "Ministerial" sitting on their desk. I suspect the accepted authority in place in those times gave way to the emergence of New Zealand's very own "Deep State" . . .  in the form of the "Parliamentary Service" aka the Wellington Bureaucrat Mafia. (But don't tell them I know they're called that around the traps.)


Frankly, I think the neutering of Ministers in this power shift has not served this country or its citizenry well at all.


Let me count the ways . . . which I will do by way of my own ranking of our "honourable" Ministers . . . and again, I'll do it in terms of how "honourably" their Ministries operate. You're going to see in just how many cases that picture leaves a whole lot to be desired. On which note, it's therefore more appropriate that MY rankings will be a "Worst Of" list. I''ll let the above-mentioned ex-Parly journo give out any "Best Of" Honours. (He struggled to get past No. 5 on his list.)


One last thing before I hook into it:  I'm going to offer you my "Worst Of" list in instalments.


The No. 1 Worst Minister in the New Zealand Cabinet


Without a doubt, the "Worst Of" award goes to the (not so) Honorable Louise Upston, the Minister of "Social Development".


What an appalling piece of work she is, with little care that her optics directly reflect her attitude, and her Ministry's culture, towards even the most under-privileged and vulnerable members of New Zealand society.


By way of example, the disabled and the sick (who may have been contributory and tax-paying members of society) are treated, in many instances, as grossly inferior to multi-generational dole bludgers. It seems to be a particular pet project of hers i.e. to target the already greatly struggling disability community and the various individuals within it.


She also appears to be perfectly happy to allow rampant wokist, reverse racism prevail in her "Ministry".


And there are multiple case studies and interviews on this very publication to prove the green lighting of the heinous conduct of a serious percentage of the personnel of this frightful agency (here's just ONE example), as well as the practices they enlist external service providers to engage in (who are only too eager to dip their ladles into the trough of taxpayer funds it "administers" to do its dirty work).


And No. 2 Spot Goes To . . . . the "Honorable" Mark Mitchell, Minister of Police.


An indisputable buffoon in front of the television cameras, his media presence failure is exceeded only by his inability (or unwillngness?) to instil performance ethics into his own office staff - and certainly at street-level operations.


Here's one case that's simply unspeakable (whereby an out-of-control, off-the-chain, egomaniac bully boy cop cost a genuinely innocent young woman her life) . . . . with the usual "blind eye" turned to the whole affair, and to the deeply grieving parents, by government "watchdog" agencies, of course.


As far as even the most moderate respect for the public from his own office staff goes . . . I have my own story to tell:


When my car was broken into and burgled, I did what we New Zealanders have always done. I rang the police. But the jeering cop on the police "help line" told me, "Nah, we don't attend break-ins."


So I did what a more proactive New Zealander would do, and I wrote to the Minister of Police, seeking clarification of this new policy. Of course, no answer ever came. So I sought the help of one of the few individuals I've happened across in the 'Hive who has integrity, who endeavoured, on my behalf, to prompt a reply from the Minister's staffers. The begrudged, prompted, one-sentence reply came:  "We will respond in due course."  Of course, more than six months later, "due course" has never arrived.


So, my Dear Readers (who are organically growing in number, and I'm honoured; thank you) . . . those are my Top 2 "Worst Of's" and why.


Spot No. 3 is tied between two Ministers who seem to have forgotten that New Zealanders might want a say in the major decisions their lobbyist mates would prefer they DON'T allow the New Zealand people to have a say in.


Stay tuned.


OH . . . and one last thing . . . this time, to the Ministers, the "Bureacrat Mafia" (i.e. the ones in the shadows that  actually run the show), the MPs,  and   those closely "monitoring" alternative media channels and publications at your behest . . . you know, the well-paid thugs you have lying in wait for an opportunity to meter out a bit of good old-fashioned (taxpayer-funded) reputational revenge. The ones who, err, "remove" "difficult" individuals (their words, not mine).


You might think YOU'RE watching US. Some of US are watching YOU.


So while you gasp in shock that I have knowledge of your behind-the-scenes "processes", please pass this on to those you retain to lurk in the shadows waiting for the nod to "execute your briefs" (I choose my words strategically, of course):

Karma can be a right bitch sometimes, and can hit you square in the face from the direction of those you (might wrongfully) assume are completely powerless to mount a defence.


ALSO OF INTEREST:


How Wellington REALLY Works: The '5 Ds' - A Series by Jordan Kelly . . . Learn the Plays & Ploys of New Zealand Government Agencies to Beat Them At Their Own Sordid Game


And . . .


Ministry of Social Development Staffer Sends Client's Personal File Information to Journalist

Other News, Reviews & Commentary

by Jordan Kelly 4 June 2025
Hey PowerCo: I Do NOT Appreciate You Giving Out My Email Address to Research Companies . . . Especially Those Who Treat YOUR Customers with Utter Contempt (& Spam Them)
by Jordan Kelly 3 June 2025
Why You Should Teach ALL Employees to Value Your Brand
by Jordan Kelly 26 May 2025
Ministry of Social Development Employee Sprays Around A Client's Private Information, then Sends It to A Journalist 
by Jordan Kelly 25 May 2025
Learn the Plays & Ploys of New Zealand Government Agencies to Beat Them At Their Own Sordid Game Since starting 'The Customer & The Constituent' back in January 2024, I've been learning things about the New Zealand political scene as it relates to Ministers and their Ministries (or agencies or bureaus), and also the behind-the-curtain Parliamentary machinations related to them. Things I almost wish now that I didn't know. But they're things that, for better or for worse, ALL New Zealanders should know, about the way the New Zealand Government and its "public service" really operates. If you don't know how things operate in reality (not just the PR fluff on their websites) in some of these big-name agencies that we are forced to deal with in one way or another, at some time or another, depending on the need or issue you're attempting to have solved or resolved, you could go around in ever-increasing frustrating circles for weeks, months and even years. Before getting absolutely nowhere . And the worst part is: That's the intention . The 5 D's 1) Delay 2) Defer 3) Deny 4) Defend 5) Dismissed They're largely self-explanatory, but it's an absolute playbook that they stick to, and apparently senior agency bureaucrats and Ministers and their staff are taught this as a rite of passage into parliamentary and career public "roles" . . . and then are sworn to secrecy over it, in a manner that almost has "Eyes Wide Shut" secret society overtones to it. You NEVER refer to the '5 D's' outside of the walls of inner sanctums. However, I'd add two more "D"s to their list: The sixth: Deaf (as in, Ignore). The seventh: Dumb .. And oh my goodness, let me count the ways (which I will do in further articles in this Series, in specific, detailed and named examples). So between your introduction herein to the 'D's', and my ongoing and, I hope, enlightening, series for your continuing and essential edification regarding How Wellington Really Works, I trust that you'll end up knowing how to deal with this sordid scene in a more strategic manner, for a less infuriating time, and maybe even with an outcome. Although there's no guarantee that any "outcome" won't be no outcome. Because that's almost always their intention. Oh, and I do hope that my pieces actually do become an ongoing series, because they do "hit men" (of sorts), too. Yeah, really. Paid generously (with your money, by the way) to "remove" "difficult" ( their words; not mine) individuals. Like me. Stay tuned. See you again shortly. I hope. (PS: I think a feel a book coming on.) COMING NEXT : A drill-down on each of the 'D's. And next up after that: The detailed argument I'll put to the private sector on why hiring an ex-bureaucrat is a very bad idea ( Hint: You might think it gives you in-house lobbyist power and back-door influence, but the price you'll pay is the '5D' customer service anti-culture they'll foster throughout your organisation. Even IF you keep them away from the frontline, it will happen by osmosis anyway. And faster than you think. The worst part? The longer you keep them, the more irreversible the damage they'll seed in your culture. Which then hits your brand. And so on. So, to C-suites everywhere, this will be a read you NEED .
by Jordan Kelly 25 May 2025
Thousands Sign Up to 'Better Wellington' Movement, Seeking Urgent Cessation to Unaffordable Rates, Economic Decay and 'Wrong Direction' of City Council
by Jordan Kelly 20 May 2025
To the Silly Old Placard-Waving (& Terrorist-Supporting) Fools . . . As Seen Daily On the Corner of Chapel & Perry Streets in Masterton
by Jordan Kelly 18 May 2025
** READERS: SEE UPDATE AT END OF ARTICLE. - The Ed. ** Dear MDC Management, Do You Have Any Standards for Your Call Centre Contractors?
by Jordan Kelly 15 May 2025
Being Known As the Woman Who Introduced 'C---' into the New Zealand Parliament, Wasn't A Smart Long-Term Strategy
by Jordan Kelly 14 May 2025
Cheap Trumps Standards, Ethics & Compassion . . . Apparently
by Jordan Kelly 13 May 2025
A Massive Upside IF It's Done Right . . . and An Unrecoverable Downside It It's Not
Show More