The Radio New Zealand building on The Terrace, Wellington. Photo / NZME
The Radio New Zealand building on The Terrace, Wellington. Photo / NZME
OPINION
I have already expressed my support for Jason Ake in a couple of media contexts. I support both his comments and his right to express them while a member of the Radio New Zealand board. I regret that he felt the need to resign from that board in the face of the Prime Minister labelling his statements “inappropriate”.
Ake does not need my support in his role as a Maori communicator – a by-Maori-for-Maori role.
I was really picking up on the impact of the repressive position of the Government for effective public sector governance. The loss of his presence is one for Radio New Zealand, but it is also one for governance more widely because it entrenches further the view that Crown Entity directors may have political views (because they do), they may bring those political views to their role (because they do) but they must not let the public know those views.
But for this comment I want to pick up on Ake’s view that his approach is “transformation and that in itself is political by nature”. Again, I agree and applaud him for that clarity.
There is a view present in our political system (as dominated by the two major parties and by some acolytes) that we can effect significant social change simply through standard historical public service practice and without disruption.
Former RNZ Board member Jason Ake. Photo / NZME
That view is mistaken and is in itself a mechanism for retaining old hierarchies of power and the inequities which result from them. Everything we know about significant social change is that it is political and divisive, there are winners and losers when power shifts.
This is true in economic and commercial activity. Whether through regulatory change or through market innovation, substantive change is typically vigorously contested. Public advocacy for and against change rages.
It is true in relation to change in legal status or social attitudes in gender politics. Perhaps not every one has noticed that but it runs back over many decades and relied on advocacy and direct action. Typically hotly contested and at least initially divisive.
It is true in relation to decolonisation, just as it was in colonisation no matter what a previous Prime Minister may have thought about peaceful transition in the 19th century.
The current rightful assertions evident around mana motuhake and tino rangitiratanga cannot just be nicely corralled within the old structures and processes. It is political.
I think that is why sometimes the actions and words of Te Pāti Māori in Parliament are criticised by others who value the ways of the colonial government era above the ways of tangata whenua.
It may be that the next election will lead the country “back” to some previous state. But that will be putting a very unstable cork into a volatile bottle of social change?
Any realistic view is that the balance has shifted from tangata whenua being assimilated into the colonial structures.
That was itself a distinct improvement on dispossession and repression but has itself been bypassed. Alongside that more assertive cultures from Te moana nui a Kiwa, Asia and other places are now part of a much more complex and rewarding social structure.
There will be strong views. They will be expressed. They will not always fit into the “politesse” of the colonial civil service structure. We need those views in our public governance structures.
Rob Campbell at his company offices in Auckland in 2014. Photo / Chris Gorman
Governance is a good place for disruptive and transformative thought and debate. But is not the only place or the most important. These are in public forums such as (increasingly) the media and it makes no sense for us to cut off people with governance knowledge and experience and engagement from also being active there. Politics is too important to be fully delegated to professional politicians.
Its just a matter maturity for us to be able to recognise this and allow its strengths to grow.
Under the various legal arrangements for Crown Entities the Ministers appoint the boards. They should not remove people or put pressure on people to resign while in position because their public views are not mutually shared or are inconvenient. Nor should they be censored or silenced. They can appoint new directors when their term is served.
We just have to hope that when they do they make the judgement on governance competence not political views.
Rob Campbell is a professional director and investor. He is chancellor at AUT, chairman of Ara Ake, chairman of NZ Rural Land, an adviser for Dave Letele’s BBM charity. He is also the former chairman of Te Whatu Ora (Health NZ).
