DOCSLIB.ORG

Letter from Hon Judith Collins to Hon Bill English

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Letter from Hon Judith Collins to Hon Bill English The Treasury Budget 2012 Information Release Release Document June 2012 www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/informationreleases/budget/2012 Key to sections of the Official Information Act 1982 under which information has been withheld. Certain information in this document has been withheld under one or more of the following sections of the Official Information Act, as applicable: [1] 6(a) - to prevent prejudice to the security or defence of New Zealand or the international relations of the government [2] 6(c) - to prevent prejudice to the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences, and the right to a fair trial [3] 9(2)(a) - to protect the privacy of natural persons, including deceased people [4] 9(2)(b)(ii) - to protect the commercial position of the person who supplied the information or who is the subject of the information [5] 9(2)(d) - to avoid prejudice to the substantial economic interests of New Zealand [6] 9(2)(f)(iv) - to maintain the current constitutional conventions protecting the confidentiality of advice tendered by ministers and officials [7] 9(2)(g)(i) - to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and frank expression of opinions [8] 9(2)(h) - to maintain legal professional privilege [9] 9(2)(i) - to enable the Crown to carry out commercial activities without disadvantage or prejudice [10] 9(2)(j) - to enable the Crown to negotiate without disadvantage or prejudice [11] 9(2)(k) - to prevent the disclosure of official information for improper gain or improper advantage [12] 9(2)(ba)(i) - to prevent prejudice to the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied. Where information has been withheld, a numbered reference to the applicable section of the Official Information Act has been made, as listed above. For example, an [4] appearing where information has been withheld in a release document refers to section 9(2)(b)(ii). In preparing this Information Release, the Treasury has considered the public interest considerations in section 9(1) of the Official Information Act. 5 April 2012 Bill English Minister of Finance Parliament Buildings Wellington Dear Minister English Amendment to Scope of an Appropriation and a Change to Net Asset Limit in Vote Justice Background 1. As part of the preparation for Budget 2012 a number of technical changes have been identified as being required. The Treasury has advised the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry) that due to the minor technical nature of these changes, they can be made via Joint Ministers approval in line with the Cabinet Circular CO(11) 6. Proposal 2. I propose that under the authority given in Cabinet Circular CO(11) 6 we: • amend the scope for the Departmental Output Expenses appropriation in Vote Justice: Public Defence Service , • update the net asset limit of the Ministry to reflect the finalised integration of the Legal Services Agency into the Ministry of Justice on 1 July 2011, and • update the net asset limit of the Ministry to reflect the implementation of the changed requirements for the recording of memorandum account transactions. Discussion Scope amendment 3. I propose that we amend the scope of the Departmental Output Expenses Public Defence Service appropriation in Vote Justice from “This appropriation is limited to the provision of representation for defendants in criminal cases at specified courts” to “This appropriation is limited to the provision of legal services by the Public Defence Service”. 4. The reason for the change is that the existing appropriation does not fully cover the scope of the work undertaken by the Public Defence Service such as duty lawyer work done at Police stations or the amicus work that is required to be performed from time to time. Net Asset Limit Amendments Legal Services Agency Integration 5. In December 2009, the then Minister of Justice announced that the Legal Services Agency would be disestablished as a Crown Entity and its functions to be transferred to the Ministry. The Legal Services Bill was passed into law in April 2011. The Legal Services Agency was disestablished on 30 June 2011, and the integration with the Ministry came into effect on 1 July 2011. 6. The Ministry’s net assets limit was increased by $28.000 million to allow for the transfer of assets associated with the merger. After year-end audited accounts were available, the net assets transferred were only $15.770 million. A reduction in the Ministry’s net asset limit of $12.230 million is sought to reflect the finalised transfer. Change in Accounting for Memorandum Accounts 7. In line with 2011 Treasury Instructions, with effect from 1 July 2011, departmental memorandum accounts have changed from being “notional” accounts requiring note disclosure to being “real” accounts requiring separate recognition within the financial statements themselves. This change requires an increase to the Ministry’s net asset limit of $1.576 million. 8. This change was made by most affected Ministries and Departments during the March Baseline Update, unfortunately it was missed by the Ministry during this process so needs to be done at this time. Consultation 9. The Treasury has been consulted and agree with the proposed updates. Financial implications 10. The proposed changes have no financial implications. Recommendations 11. I recommend that you: 1. Agree that the current scope of Vote Justice - Departmental Output YES / NO Expenses Public Defence Service be amended to: “This appropriation is limited to the provision of legal services by the Public Defence Service” 2. Note that the new scope will be in effect from 1 July 2012 and will be included in the Estimates of Appropriations for 2012/13. 3. Agree that following the finalised integration of the Legal Services Agency YES / NO into the Ministry, the net asset limit of the Ministry be reduced by $12.230 million. 2 4. Agree that following the introduction of the changed memorandum YES / NO account requirements the net asset limit of the Ministry be increased by $1.576 million. 5. Agree that the changes to the projected balances of net assets for YES / NO 2011/12 above be included in the 2011/12 Supplementary Estimates of Appropriations, and that in the interim, the increase be met from Imprest Supply. Yours sincerely Hon Judith Collins Minister of Justice NOTED / APPROVED / NOT APPROVED Hon Bill English Minister of Finance Date: 3 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 NEWS Colmar Brunton Poll 22 – 26 May 2021
    1 NEWS Colmar Brunton Poll 22 – 26 May 2021 Attention: Television New Zealand Contact: (04) 913-3000 Release date: 27 May 2021 Level One 46 Sale Street, Auckland CBD PO Box 33690 Takapuna Auckland 0740 Ph: (09) 919-9200 Level 9, Legal House 101 Lambton Quay PO Box 3622, Wellington 6011 Ph: (04) 913-3000 www.colmarbrunton.co.nz Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Methodology summary ................................................................................................................................... 2 Summary of results .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Key political events ................................................................ .......................................................................... 4 Question order and wording ............................................................................................................................ 5 Party vote ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Preferred Prime Minister ................................................................................................................................. 8 Public Sector wage freeze .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Transcript of Prime Minister John Key's Speech to the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce Function, 2Nd July 2015. Good
    A transcript of Prime Minister John Key's speech to the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce function, 2nd July 2015. Good afternoon. Thank you Peter for that warm welcome and for the Chamber's hosting of this event. It's good to see so many of you here today. Can I start by acknowledging Mayor Lianne Dalziel and other local body representatives from around the region. Just as central government has to make some tough decisions and trade-offs, so too do councils as we work together to rebuild this city. Together, we're making significant progress. Although, of course, there is still much to do. I'd also like to acknowledge my ministerial colleagues Gerry Brownlee, Amy Adams and Nicky Wagner. Gerry has provided strong leadership in overseeing what continues to be one of New Zealand's largest and most complex undertakings. Most recently he has been turning his mind to where we go following the expiry of the special earthquake recovery laws next April. I'll have some more to say about that in a few minutes. As we've said before, the estimated cost of the rebuild is around $40 billion. As a proportion of the economy, this makes it one of the most expensive natural disasters in the developed world. So thanks to all of you here who have worked so hard since the first earthquake in September 2010. I want to start today by talking about the economy and the significant contribution Canterbury makes to it. A strong and growing economy allows us to provide essential public services like hospitals and schools, and support our most vulnerable families.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Trust Inquiry Information Release
    The Treasury Foreign Trust Inquiry Information Release Release Document July 2016 www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/reviews-consultation/foreign-trust-disclosure-rules Key to sections of the Official Information Act 1982 under which information has been withheld. Certain information in this document has been withheld under one or more of the following sections of the Official Information Act, as applicable: to prevent prejudice to the security or defence of New Zealand or the international [1] 6(a) relations of the government [2] to protect the privacy of natural persons, including deceased people 9(2)(a) to maintain the current constitutional conventions protecting the confidentiality of advice [3] 9(2)(f)(iv) tendered by ministers and officials to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and frank expression [4] 9(2)(g)(i) of opinions that the making available of the information requested would be contrary to the [5] 18(c)(i) provisions of a specified enactment [the Tax Administration Act 1994] Where information has been withheld, a numbered reference to the applicable section of the Official Information Act has been made, as listed above. For example, a [2] appearing where information has been withheld in a release document refers to section 9(2)(a). In preparing this Information Release, the Treasury has considered the public interest considerations in section 9 and section 18 of the Official Information Act. Treasury:3534443v1 From: Jessica Rowe <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, 14 April 2016 12:59
    [Show full text]
  • China's Political Influence Activities Under Xi Jinping Professor
    Magic Weapons: China's political influence activities under Xi Jinping Professor Anne-Marie Brady Global Fellow, Wilson Center, Washington, DC; Department of Political Science and International Relations University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand In September 2014 Xi Jinping gave a speech on the importance of united front work— political influence activities—calling it one of the CCP’s “magic weapons”. The Chinese government’s foreign influence activities have accelerated under Xi. China’s foreign influence activities have the potential to undermine the sovereignty and integrity of the political system of targeted states. Conference paper presented at the conference on “The corrosion of democracy under China’s global influence,” supported by the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, and hosted in Arlington, Virginia, USA, September 16-17, 2017. Key points: • CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping is leading an accelerated expansion of political influence activities worldwide. • The expansion of these activities is connected to both the CCP government’s domestic pressures and foreign agenda. • The paper creates a template of the policies and modes of China’s expanded foreign influence activities in the Xi era. • The paper uses this template to examine the extent to which one representative small state, New Zealand, is being targeted by China’s new influence agenda. Executive Summary In June 2017 the New York Times and The Economist featured stories on China's political influence in Australia. The New York Times headline asked "Are Australia's Politics too Easy to Corrupt?,"1 while The Economist sarcastically referred to China as the "Meddle Country."2 The two articles were reacting to an investigation by Fairfax Media and ABC into the extent of China's political interference in Australia,3 that built on internal enquiries into the same issue by ASIO and Australia's Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet in 2015 and 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Hon Bill English Minister of Finance
    Hon Bill English Minister of Finance Speech to the Auckland Chamber of Commerce and Massey University Building Our Economic Opportunity Embargoed until 12.30pm Thursday February 17 2011 1 Good afternoon and thank you to the Auckland Chamber of Commerce and Massey University for inviting me back to speak to you this year. A lot has happened since I was at this forum 12 months ago. Throughout 2010, aftershocks from the global financial crisis continued to ripple around the world. Today I’m going to talk about what we are doing to equip New Zealand for this changed world. First, the end goal is one we can all agree on. We’d all like to see our economy growing at a strong, sustainable pace, creating new jobs, and supporting all the things Kiwis are good at. Who’s to say what we’re actually capable of? The sky is the limit. But more objectively, we can set a minimum standard of what the economy ought to achieve simply by looking at what we’ve managed in the recent past. Between 1989 and 2005, over a 17-year period, on average the New Zealand economy: • Grew GDP by over 3 per cent per year • Expanded export volumes by over 5 per cent a year • And created 32,000 jobs a year We did this despite one world recession, two Gulf wars, the Asian crisis, tech wreck and various other setbacks. Government finances improved steadily through this period. Why did we perform so well? Put simply, we did it because the economy was competitive.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Investment Panel Report 2016
    The Treasury Budget 2016 Information Release Release Document July 2016 www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/informationreleases/budget/2016 Key to sections of the Official Information Act 1982 under which information has been withheld. Certain information in this document has been withheld under one or more of the following sections of the Official Information Act, as applicable: to prevent prejudice to the security or defence of New Zealand or the [1] 6(a) international relations of the government to prevent prejudice to the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, [4] 6(c) investigation, and detection of offences, and the right to a fair trial to damage seriously the economy of New Zealand by disclosing prematurely [11] decisions to change or continue government economic or financial policies 6(e)(vi) relating to the entering into of overseas trade agreements. [23] to protect the privacy of natural persons, including deceased people 9(2)(a) to protect the commercial position of the person who supplied the information [25] 9(2)(b)(ii) or who is the subject of the information to prevent prejudice to the supply of similar information, or information from the [26] same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should 9(2)(ba)(i) continue to be supplied to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of [27] 9(2)(ba)(ii) any enactment, where the making available of the information - would be likely otherwise
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservative Agenda for Constitutional Reform
    UCL DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE The Constitution Unit Department of Political Science UniversityThe Constitution College London Unit 29–30 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU phone: 020 7679 4977 fax: 020 7679 4978 The Conservative email: [email protected] www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit A genda for Constitutional The Constitution Unit at UCL is the UK’s foremost independent research body on constitutional change. It is part of the UCL School of Public Policy. THE CONSERVATIVE Robert Hazell founded the Constitution Unit in 1995 to do detailed research and planning on constitutional reform in the UK. The Unit has done work on every aspect AGENDA of the UK’s constitutional reform programme: devolution in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the English regions, reform of the House of Lords, electoral reform, R parliamentary reform, the new Supreme Court, the conduct of referendums, freedom eform Prof FOR CONSTITUTIONAL of information, the Human Rights Act. The Unit is the only body in the UK to cover the whole of the constitutional reform agenda. REFORM The Unit conducts academic research on current or future policy issues, often in collaboration with other universities and partners from overseas. We organise regular R programmes of seminars and conferences. We do consultancy work for government obert and other public bodies. We act as special advisers to government departments and H parliamentary committees. We work closely with government, parliament and the azell judiciary. All our work has a sharply practical focus, is concise and clearly written, timely and relevant to policy makers and practitioners. The Unit has always been multi disciplinary, with academic researchers drawn mainly from politics and law.
    [Show full text]
  • Election Will Be Crush Vs Smile It Was Fashionable at One Point in the Last Generation and a Half for Some Men to Refer to Their Inner Feminism
    JT col for July 18 2020 - Crush v smile Election will be crush vs smile It was fashionable at one point in the last generation and a half for some men to refer to their inner feminism. I was one. But past performance not withstanding, I must still be viewed as a male chauv…or worse, an old male chauv. There, I’ve said it. The risk in what follows seems less: I’m delighted the leadership of the country will be contested by two women, Jacinda Ardern versus Judith Collins. How appropriate, given we were the first to “allow” women to vote. Not- withstanding further accidents, we’re headed into an election in which a woman is guaranteed to be Prime Minister. I must have had an inkling about this, because last week I went along to see Collins for myself. A self-declared good mate of Johnathan Young’s, she turned up in Taranaki to speak at his election launch, visit around, promote her recently published memoirs, et cetera. I was one of 110 people keen enough to brave a freezing night to observe this politician with a long game; good sense told us she was probably positioning for a post-election leadership run after Todd Muller was sacrificed on the altar of Ardern. Even if Collins can't out-Ardern her opponent come September, she'll hold on. Her strategy is one based on people's short memories for her missteps since she got into parliament 18 years ago. The National Party also seems temporarily to have lost its appetite for the youngish and the novel.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2010
    nd 22 Annual Conference Annual Report 2010 The major challenge since the 21st Annual Conference in December 2009 has been the national DHB MECA negotiations. Other challenges include promoting clinical leadership and engagement in DHBs consistent with the Time for Quality agreement and the In Good Hands policy statement, and the Government’s proposed amendments to the Employment Relations Act. The members of the National Executive are: President Jeff Brown (MidCentral) Vice President David Jones (Capital & Coast) Region 1 Judy Bent (Auckland) Himadri Seth (Waitemata) Region 2 John Bonning (Waikato) Paul Wilson (Bay of Plenty) Region 3 Hein Stander (Tairawhiti) - since June following the resignation of Torben Iversen in May Tim Frendin (Hawke’s Bay) Region 4 Brian Craig (Canterbury) John MacDonald (Canterbury) In May Torben Iversen resigned to take up a specialist position in Victoria (although still working one week every four in Tairawhiti). While technically eligible to continue on the National Executive practical considerations meant that he chose to resign. The Association is appreciative of the important contribution Dr Iversen made while on the Executive including bringing to the fore the position of members in smaller provincial DHBs, and for his role as Association representative in Tairawhiti. In June Hein Stander was elected unopposed in a by-election. The National Executive has met on four occasions in Wellington since the last Annual Conference, with a fifth meeting to be held immediately preceding this Conference. On 17-18 February the National Executive held its annual two day meeting to discuss strategic directions, the first day being informal. The informal day included: • Preparing for the national DHB MECA negotiations, including strategic direction and the draft claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Scrutiny of Human Rights in New Zealand (Report)
    PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN NEW ZEALAND: GLASS HALF FULL? Prof. Judy McGregor and Prof. Margaret Wilson AUT UNIVERSITY | UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO RESEARCH FUNDED BY THE NEW ZEALAND LAW FOUNDATION Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2 Recent Scholarship ..................................................................................................................... 3 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 22 Select committee controversy ................................................................................................. 28 Rights-infringing legislation. .................................................................................................... 32 Criminal Records (Expungement of Convictions for Historical Homosexual Offences) Bill. ... 45 Domestic Violence-Victims’ Protection Bill ............................................................................. 60 The Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill ................................................................................ 75 Parliamentary scrutiny of human rights in New Zealand: Summary report. .......................... 89 1 Introduction This research is a focused project on one aspect of the parliamentary process. It provides a contextualised account of select committees and their scrutiny of human rights with a particular
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 Extract
    EXTRACT FROM DIRTY POLITICS BY NICKY HAGER. PUBLISHED IN 2014 BY CRAIG POTTON PUBLISHING. CHAPTER 4 THE CRUSHER AND THE ATTACK DOG The attack bloggers’ point of contact in the National government, year after year, remained John Key’s office. But Cameron Slater had another close friend and ally in the government, Cabinet minister Judith Collins. They had much in common. One cultivated the iron woman persona of Crusher Collins, future prime minister, the other the reckless bully-boy persona of Whale Oil, crusading outsider. They were drawn together by right-wing politics and a shared attraction to aggressive and often petty attack politics. Slater was a devoted supporter of Collins, using his blog to promote her and to attack her critics. Collins, in return, fed a continuous supply of material to Slater: public press releases, political gossip, tip-offs and serious leaks. She boast- ed for him in 2013 that ‘you might not like it but Whaleoil is better informed and better read than any other news outlet or social media’.1 They talked often by phone, and in the evenings and weekends they chatted via Facebook. In work hours Collins e-mailed him directly from her sixth-floor Beehive office. Often their exchanges were about small events of the day. The following are typical of Collins’s messages: ‘You should whack these guys hard, they are truly pathetic’;2 ‘Cam, FYI. Another own goal for plughead’, her name for Labour MP Clayton Cosgrove;3 could he edit her Wikipedia page and replace an unflattering photo;4 and, forwarding a document, ‘I think I seri- ously annoyed certain people over it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ministry of Public Input
    The Ministry of Public Input: Report and Recommendations for Practice By Associate Professor Jennifer Lees-Marshment The University of Auckland, New Zealand August 2014 www.lees-marshment.org [email protected] Executive Summary Political leadership is undergoing a profound evolution that changes the role that politicians and the public play in decision making in democracy. Rather than simply waiting for voters to exercise their judgement in elections, political elites now use an increasingly varied range of public input mechanisms including consultation, deliberation, informal meetings, travels out in the field, visits to the frontline and market research to obtain feedback before and after they are elected. Whilst politicians have always solicited public opinion in one form or another, the nature, scale, and purpose of mechanisms that seek citizen involvement in policy making are becoming more diversified and extensive. Government ministers collect different forms of public input at all levels of government, across departments and through their own offices at all stages of the policy process. This expansion and diversification of public input informs and influences our leaders’ decisions, and thus has the potential to strengthen citizen voices within the political system, improve policy outcomes and enhance democracy. However current practice wastes both resources and the hope that public input can enrich democracy. If all the individual public input activities government currently engages in were collated and added up it would demonstrate that a vast amount of money and resources is already spent seeking views from outside government. But it often goes unseen, is uncoordinated, dispersed and unchecked. We need to find a way to ensure this money is spent much more effectively within the realities of government and leadership.
    [Show full text]