In the aftermath of losing chair positions at the Environmental Protection Authority and Te Whatu Ora, Campbell hasn’t held back in defending himself against the accusation that he was not impartial.
“If they looked up their Oxford Dictionary, they would find that impartial is being equally critical of both parties,” Campbell told Newstalk ZB broadcaster Heather Du Plessis-Allan.
“There’s nothing about impartial that says that you shut up or sit there like a stuffed dummy.”
This last aspersion cast at the bureaucrats that fill the halls of Government is important when viewed in the context of business and politics in this country.
Campbell was put into his position at Te Whatu Ora specifically because he had proven himself an adept operator in business over the years. His talent in management and organisation were the reasons he got the job in the first place. Campbell didn’t take this position for the money.
Businesspeople in the latter stages of their careers don’t take Government jobs if they’re still chasing big bucks. They do it because they hope to make a difference.
The problem with the virtue of political impartiality in the modern context is that business people today increasingly express their views, often without restraint, on social media channels.
Scroll through LinkedIn on any given day and you’ll find no shortage of high-flying executives expressing their views on a wide assortment of topics. In the age of brand purpose, some executives, in fact, see it as part of their job to take a position on certain issues.
Take the example of Vodafone CEO Jason Paris, who often responds directly to people who question the company’s use of te reo in its communications, something that could easily be construed as a political stance in that he’s choosing not to stay neutral on an issue that remains controversial in some parts of society.
If the expression of a political stance is used to preclude executives from holding board roles, then it could prove tricky to appoint some of the best management talent in this country to key government roles. You’re thereby adding an additional limitation to an already limited talent pool.
Smiling villains
It’s easy to understand why politicians on the right were so inflamed by the prospect of Campbell criticising National’s Three Waters policy. If a right-leaning official had made parallel remarks about another controversial policy, there would be a similar baying for blood from the left.
But the problem with these rules of impartiality is that they were written before social media existed - and anyone could express a view online.
Social media has, in some ways, lifted the veil on the farce of impartiality. It helps to show what people actually think. Rather than just getting hearsay of what someone uttered behind closed doors, we now get to hear first-hand what executives actually care about.
As Shakespeare’s Hamlet famously said: “That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain – at least I am sure it may be so in Denmark.”
The pretence of impartiality isn’t real. It’s a smile on the face of a bureaucrat who is simply too clever to say what they really think in public.
Think this is unreasonable?
Look at what happened at a recent seminar when the bureaucrats at Auckland Transport were given the protection of anonymity to say what they really thought about cycling. The Spinoff reported that the online seminar was quickly hijacked by AT employees who complained fervently about the problems with cyclists across Auckland. Cyclists were blamed for breaking the rules, using footpaths, veering into car or bus lanes and posing risks to pedestrians.
With these views so entrenched within the organisation, it’s little surprise progress on the cycling front has been painfully slow.
At least we know Rob Campbell for the villain he is. Those anonymous commenters at Auckland Transport will continue to sit around the table and smile obediently when the issue of cycling is raised.
Also, do not underestimate the broader political pantomime at play here. Free speech advocate and Act Party leader David Seymour went after Campbell to make a point, and the Government has quite deftly used the whole saga to show how it can be tough when necessary while simultaneously assuaging concerns about Three Waters.
It’s for moments like these that Niccolo Machiavelli wrote in The Prince: “It is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have enumerated, but it is very necessary to appear to have them.”
All attention will now turn to who the Government will appoint to replace Campbell in these critical roles. Will it be a stuffed dummy or a staid, careful bureaucrat?
Whoever it might be, you’ll spot them by a smile so blindingly bright you may struggle to see them for who they really are.
