My headline has no punchline, I want a serious answer.
I can't remember a time in the last five years or so when there wasn't a government taskforce of one sort or another consulting on major and minor economic issues. Naively, I thought it was all moving to a stunning
conclusion.
Instead, they just keep on rolling out those symposiums and fora to 'look into' things. And now we have the Independent Savings Working Group charged with investigating ways to lift the level of national savings.
A worthy topic and the six experts (who will meet six times and report after six months) come cheap at a collective $70,000 fee.
But why is the government using another working group and not, say, tapping into its own in-house resources (also known as the public service) who can then consult with relevant external parties for free?
Bill English has anticipated my question and conveniently posted an answer under the 'SAVINGS WORKING GROUP - MEDIA Qs AND As section:
"Why is the Government using another working group?
The challenge of increasing New Zealand's national savings is important, requiring consideration of a number of issues and potential options.
The Government wants this process to be open and transparent - and to encourage constructive public debate. Working Groups have fulfilled this role well in other areas such as taxation, social housing and welfare."
That all sounds plausible - democracy in action and so on. But maybe it simply reflects an 'outsourcing' business model, where difficult problems can be shifted off balance sheet and responsibility diluted.
