March 16, 2026 • 10 mins
Political appointments are being scrutinised after the resignation of KiwiRail director Scott O’Donnell due to conflicts of interest.
Political analyst Bryce Edwards described the appointment as a “farce”, and the result of a broken system and “rotten governance.”
O’Donnell is a major player in the trucking and transport sector, and some of the ten companies he’s involved in supply services to KiwiRail – though a management plan was put in place to mitigate that.
While he doesn’t think there should be a rule against political appointments, Edwards told Kerre Woodham that there needs to be better processes and more scrutiny.
He says at the moment, any government of the day can get away with whatever they want.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Kerry Wood and Morning's podcast from
News Talks head B.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Political analyst Bryce Edwards has described the governance of Kiwi
Whale as a broken system and a farce following the
resignation of directors Scott O'Donnell. Edwards's primary criticisms focus somebody
terms cronyism and rotten governments and political appointments. Political analyst
and director of Victoria University's Democracy Project, Brice Edwins joins
me now and a very good morning to you, Hi, Kerry.
(00:37):
This is nothing new, is it, And no it's not
even the worst example.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
No, no, So obviously I'm just talking about some of
the recent changes in the Kiwi Rail Board. But this
is something that goes on in all governments around the
world where they have to make appointments to senior positions
on boards and all sorts of kind of quangos and
government agencies. And you know, there's always the ability of
(01:03):
governments of the day to put two you know who
goes into these top roles, and you know, and it's
right and proper that in New Zealand, the behive, the
Prime Minister, the ministers do make those decisions. But sometimes
well throughout the world at the moment, there's a bit
more sensitivity about whether they are putting into place too
(01:26):
often their cronies, you know, the people that are you know,
from their political parties or giving them donations, et cetera.
And so there's a bit of a reform movement for
cleaning that up and just having a better process so
that the public can be more assured that we're getting
quality candidates that are appointed to these roles.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Why is it right and proper that the government of
the day do it. Why wouldn't we have an independent
Appointments commissioner that knows the merits and knows what's required
for the job.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
I think you've got a government that's elected every three years,
you know, it's a democracy, and they should have some
ability to put people into roles that they know are
going to work in the same direction as the government's
going and that they are, yeah, kind of in sync.
I think there's always some room for that. It's just
(02:17):
if it gets too much, if there's too many of them,
if there's too blatant, it can kind of lose public
faith in that process. And there's no rules in New
Zealand about how this is done, and so all governments,
successive governments have done this. They've built some of their
former ministers and MPs into roles after they've left parliament.
(02:40):
And I don't think there should be any rule against that,
but we just need more scrutiny of it and perhaps
some better processes to make those appointments, because at the
moment there's really nothing and any government of the day
can just yeah, get away with whatever they want.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
And they can also walk out of cabinet on Friday
and on Monday set up as a lobbyist with all
the insider knowledge they have.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
Oh look, that's another big issue, yes, of the revolving
door they call it, whereby people who are in politics
at a senior level or even officials and they are
in charge of regulating something in the private sector, they
have all the networks through governing and all the information
insider knowledge, and then they can just leave and then
(03:26):
monetize that information by then working as a lobbyist to work,
you know, have clients who are in those companies that
they've just been regulating. And so again that's sort of
one of the areas around the world that's getting a
bit more attention, Like is this a problem is should
there be rules about it so that you can't just
walk out like so the classic one is Chris Farfoy,
(03:48):
what about four years ago, went from being the Minister
of Justice and lots of other kind of important roles
to then being a lobbyist for hire after he had
left the beehive, you know, he left halfway through the
political cycle, and then he was drumming up business for
you know, people that I think really do want those
(04:09):
skills and people with all the knowledge of those inside contacts,
and they were willing to pay a lot of money
for them. But of course that's not necessarily a kind
of level playing field for the rest of business, you know.
So there's lots of problems for democracy and business when
you've just got connections about who you know and you know,
(04:30):
instant access into the beehive because you've hired the right person.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
But yeah, and when you look at Steve Mahari as well,
you know, appointed as the chair of pharmac against official
advice to reappoint the existing.
Speaker 3 (04:42):
Chair, it's yes, no, it's quite astounding. And and like
I say, I think there is sometimes people that are
appointed that do really have the skills. Yeah, politics long enough.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
I would have thought the English would be fine to
do the kind of order review, but maybe not.
Speaker 3 (05:01):
I think there's lots of arguments in favor of that, absolutely,
and especially if I've had a bit time out of politics,
it's even more okay. But the problem with the bill
English one, well there's a few problems, but the big
one is there's been so many of these mp sorry
ministers from that key English government. So there's Paula Bennett
has replaced Steve Mahray, it's the running farmac. You've had
(05:26):
Stephen Joyce, Stephen Joyce come in with infrastructure, Simon Bridges
being chair of MZTA. There's been a few others. I
forget them all, and by themselves they might be individually
good appointments, but when you have so many of them,
I think it does give the public a cause well
pause for cause, really cause for pause the phrase about
(05:49):
whether they're just jobs for mates, except.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
That you would argue that a lot of those ministers
were incredibly competent, and that's the kind of competency you
need to yeah, to run organizations and sometimes and when
you've got members of the public, like one of my
Texters who was like who could be bothered, you know,
with all the politics and sitting inside all day and
it would be so bored.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
They're pretty well, pretty well remunerated. Money is not no, no,
but you know some of these roles are you know,
rarely at the top echelon of the pay scale, and
so no, they're doing all right. And part of the
problem though, is that you end up providing a bit
of incentive for politicians when they're in the beehive or
(06:36):
in Parliament to kind of have their their eye on
the price of well, once I leave politics, I'll make
the really big money and it can have an impact.
According to a lot of political theorists, it can have
an impact on how they behave when they're in power.
So they don't want to rock the boat. They need
to keep all their friends, you know, after they leave politics,
(06:56):
and they need to potentially give nice deals to the
companies that are regulating because you know, if you're John
Key and you're Prime Minister and then you want to
be chair of an z as soon as you leave politics,
you kind of want to be on side with the banks.
And I'm not suggesting he did that, but it raises
those suspicions. So Yeah, a bit of a standdown period
(07:20):
between being between running the country and then running the
big businesses. I think isn't a bad idea.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
So what are the solutions? You know, I just wonder
whether people care, you know, like I know what people
would rather be talking about this morning, and we're just
not going to talk about it because I don't know,
I don't it's just it's not those worthy.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
Well, no, all of these issues are integrity issues, and
there is a worldwide sort of growth of concern about
the people that are governing us and the people that
are in these official roles as well. So not the politicians,
but the people in these governance roles if they are
there for the public interest or whether they are there
(08:01):
for their own interest. And we're seeing a rise in
no survey results that show people are discontented and not
trusting those people. And so whether it's Chris Hipkins and
his personal life or whether it's people being appointed without
any scrutiny to government roles and then getting large amounts
of money, there's the connection here that the public are
(08:24):
less trusting and feel that the system's not working. And
so across the world we're seeing the rise of outside
of politicians from the left and right, people like Donald
Trump on the right, or there's various people on the
left that are kind of campaigning on this and sort
of being the anti establishment or populist type reaction to that.
(08:48):
And it hasn't really kind of played out in New
Zealand yet. Well, sometimes it doesn't work. You're right about
that too, But it is a major theme of world
politics at the moment that people are quite angry about
the status quo.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
But it's all very well to rail against the government,
but if we're not willing to do anything about ourselves,
you know, if we're not willing to put up our
hands and say, okay, well I'll start by serving on
the board of my local school or I'll start And
I know we're all time poor, but we can't just
rail against the government because the government's us in a democracy.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Yeah, but I.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Still think we need to pressure those politicians, especially those
ones standing at election, and say, well, what is your
stance on appointments to these plumb rolls. You know, would
you be prepared to have something like a public Appointments
Commissioner to sort of do these things in a more open,
transparent way, You would you be willing to rule out
(09:43):
just giving all your former mates that you've served with
and behive roles. And I think that's really the answer.
Just a bit more pressure on the politicians to raise
their levels of integrity, do things in a more robust,
clean way, and that would go a long way to
(10:03):
fixing things.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
And at the very very minimum, a two year stand
down for ministers before they can put out their shingle.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
Yeah. I mean it's difficult to get those rules right,
but we are the only, I don't know, one of
the few countries in the OECD that doesn't have those rules.
So you know, what we're seeing a lot of former
ministers doing would be quite illegal in places like the US,
lots of parts of Europe, and so I do think
(10:35):
New Zealand needs to catch up with these rules. It
will enhance democracy, it will cut out vested interests.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
Nice to talk as always, and I thank you for
your analysis. Brace Edwards, political analyst, director of the Democracy
Project in association with the Victoria University of Wellington.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
For more from Kerry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news talks that'd be from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Kerry Wood and Morning's podcast from
News Talks head B.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Political analyst Bryce Edwards has described the governance of Kiwi
Whale as a broken system and a farce following the
resignation of directors Scott O'Donnell. Edwards's primary criticisms focus somebody
terms cronyism and rotten governments and political appointments. Political analyst
and director of Victoria University's Democracy Project, Brice Edwins joins
me now and a very good morning to you, Hi, Kerry.
(00:37):
This is nothing new, is it, And no it's not
even the worst example.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
No, no, So obviously I'm just talking about some of
the recent changes in the Kiwi Rail Board. But this
is something that goes on in all governments around the
world where they have to make appointments to senior positions
on boards and all sorts of kind of quangos and
government agencies. And you know, there's always the ability of
(01:03):
governments of the day to put two you know who
goes into these top roles, and you know, and it's
right and proper that in New Zealand, the behive, the
Prime Minister, the ministers do make those decisions. But sometimes
well throughout the world at the moment, there's a bit
more sensitivity about whether they are putting into place too
(01:26):
often their cronies, you know, the people that are you know,
from their political parties or giving them donations, et cetera.
And so there's a bit of a reform movement for
cleaning that up and just having a better process so
that the public can be more assured that we're getting
quality candidates that are appointed to these roles.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Why is it right and proper that the government of
the day do it. Why wouldn't we have an independent
Appointments commissioner that knows the merits and knows what's required
for the job.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
I think you've got a government that's elected every three years,
you know, it's a democracy, and they should have some
ability to put people into roles that they know are
going to work in the same direction as the government's
going and that they are, yeah, kind of in sync.
I think there's always some room for that. It's just
(02:17):
if it gets too much, if there's too many of them,
if there's too blatant, it can kind of lose public
faith in that process. And there's no rules in New
Zealand about how this is done, and so all governments,
successive governments have done this. They've built some of their
former ministers and MPs into roles after they've left parliament.
(02:40):
And I don't think there should be any rule against that,
but we just need more scrutiny of it and perhaps
some better processes to make those appointments, because at the
moment there's really nothing and any government of the day
can just yeah, get away with whatever they want.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
And they can also walk out of cabinet on Friday
and on Monday set up as a lobbyist with all
the insider knowledge they have.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
Oh look, that's another big issue, yes, of the revolving
door they call it, whereby people who are in politics
at a senior level or even officials and they are
in charge of regulating something in the private sector, they
have all the networks through governing and all the information
insider knowledge, and then they can just leave and then
(03:26):
monetize that information by then working as a lobbyist to work,
you know, have clients who are in those companies that
they've just been regulating. And so again that's sort of
one of the areas around the world that's getting a
bit more attention, Like is this a problem is should
there be rules about it so that you can't just
walk out like so the classic one is Chris Farfoy,
(03:48):
what about four years ago, went from being the Minister
of Justice and lots of other kind of important roles
to then being a lobbyist for hire after he had
left the beehive, you know, he left halfway through the
political cycle, and then he was drumming up business for
you know, people that I think really do want those
(04:09):
skills and people with all the knowledge of those inside contacts,
and they were willing to pay a lot of money
for them. But of course that's not necessarily a kind
of level playing field for the rest of business, you know.
So there's lots of problems for democracy and business when
you've just got connections about who you know and you know,
(04:30):
instant access into the beehive because you've hired the right person.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
But yeah, and when you look at Steve Mahari as well,
you know, appointed as the chair of pharmac against official
advice to reappoint the existing.
Speaker 3 (04:42):
Chair, it's yes, no, it's quite astounding. And and like
I say, I think there is sometimes people that are
appointed that do really have the skills. Yeah, politics long enough.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
I would have thought the English would be fine to
do the kind of order review, but maybe not.
Speaker 3 (05:01):
I think there's lots of arguments in favor of that, absolutely,
and especially if I've had a bit time out of politics,
it's even more okay. But the problem with the bill
English one, well there's a few problems, but the big
one is there's been so many of these mp sorry
ministers from that key English government. So there's Paula Bennett
has replaced Steve Mahray, it's the running farmac. You've had
(05:26):
Stephen Joyce, Stephen Joyce come in with infrastructure, Simon Bridges
being chair of MZTA. There's been a few others. I
forget them all, and by themselves they might be individually
good appointments, but when you have so many of them,
I think it does give the public a cause well
pause for cause, really cause for pause the phrase about
(05:49):
whether they're just jobs for mates, except.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
That you would argue that a lot of those ministers
were incredibly competent, and that's the kind of competency you
need to yeah, to run organizations and sometimes and when
you've got members of the public, like one of my
Texters who was like who could be bothered, you know,
with all the politics and sitting inside all day and
it would be so bored.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
They're pretty well, pretty well remunerated. Money is not no, no,
but you know some of these roles are you know,
rarely at the top echelon of the pay scale, and
so no, they're doing all right. And part of the
problem though, is that you end up providing a bit
of incentive for politicians when they're in the beehive or
(06:36):
in Parliament to kind of have their their eye on
the price of well, once I leave politics, I'll make
the really big money and it can have an impact.
According to a lot of political theorists, it can have
an impact on how they behave when they're in power.
So they don't want to rock the boat. They need
to keep all their friends, you know, after they leave politics,
(06:56):
and they need to potentially give nice deals to the
companies that are regulating because you know, if you're John
Key and you're Prime Minister and then you want to
be chair of an z as soon as you leave politics,
you kind of want to be on side with the banks.
And I'm not suggesting he did that, but it raises
those suspicions. So Yeah, a bit of a standdown period
(07:20):
between being between running the country and then running the
big businesses. I think isn't a bad idea.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
So what are the solutions? You know, I just wonder
whether people care, you know, like I know what people
would rather be talking about this morning, and we're just
not going to talk about it because I don't know,
I don't it's just it's not those worthy.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
Well, no, all of these issues are integrity issues, and
there is a worldwide sort of growth of concern about
the people that are governing us and the people that
are in these official roles as well. So not the politicians,
but the people in these governance roles if they are
there for the public interest or whether they are there
(08:01):
for their own interest. And we're seeing a rise in
no survey results that show people are discontented and not
trusting those people. And so whether it's Chris Hipkins and
his personal life or whether it's people being appointed without
any scrutiny to government roles and then getting large amounts
of money, there's the connection here that the public are
(08:24):
less trusting and feel that the system's not working. And
so across the world we're seeing the rise of outside
of politicians from the left and right, people like Donald
Trump on the right, or there's various people on the
left that are kind of campaigning on this and sort
of being the anti establishment or populist type reaction to that.
(08:48):
And it hasn't really kind of played out in New
Zealand yet. Well, sometimes it doesn't work. You're right about
that too, But it is a major theme of world
politics at the moment that people are quite angry about
the status quo.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
But it's all very well to rail against the government,
but if we're not willing to do anything about ourselves,
you know, if we're not willing to put up our
hands and say, okay, well I'll start by serving on
the board of my local school or I'll start And
I know we're all time poor, but we can't just
rail against the government because the government's us in a democracy.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Yeah, but I.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Still think we need to pressure those politicians, especially those
ones standing at election, and say, well, what is your
stance on appointments to these plumb rolls. You know, would
you be prepared to have something like a public Appointments
Commissioner to sort of do these things in a more open,
transparent way, You would you be willing to rule out
(09:43):
just giving all your former mates that you've served with
and behive roles. And I think that's really the answer.
Just a bit more pressure on the politicians to raise
their levels of integrity, do things in a more robust,
clean way, and that would go a long way to
(10:03):
fixing things.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
And at the very very minimum, a two year stand
down for ministers before they can put out their shingle.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
Yeah. I mean it's difficult to get those rules right,
but we are the only, I don't know, one of
the few countries in the OECD that doesn't have those rules.
So you know, what we're seeing a lot of former
ministers doing would be quite illegal in places like the US,
lots of parts of Europe, and so I do think
(10:35):
New Zealand needs to catch up with these rules. It
will enhance democracy, it will cut out vested interests.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
Nice to talk as always, and I thank you for
your analysis. Brace Edwards, political analyst, director of the Democracy
Project in association with the Victoria University of Wellington.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
For more from Kerry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news talks that'd be from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Kingdom of Fraud
It’s the unlikeliest of criminal partnerships: a devout polygamist from an insular Utah sect joining forces with a shadowy Armenian tycoon from LA. The result - a billion dollar fraud conspiracy. In Kingdom of Fraud, investigative reporter Michele McPhee traces the origins of the extraordinary alliance between Jacob Kingston and Levon Termendzhyan. Together, the two men trigger the largest tax investigation in American history and weave around themselves a web of dirty cops, influential political relationships and transnational money laundering. All this is set against the backdrop of Jacob Kingston’s clan – The Order. A powerful and secretive polygamist organization in Salt Lake City. To whom Jacob is desperate to prove his worth. Kingdom of Fraud is produced by Novel for iHeart Podcasts. For more from Novel, visit https://novel.audio/. You can listen to new episodes of Kingdom of Fraud completely ad-free and 1 week early with an iHeart True Crime+ subscription, available exclusively on Apple Podcasts. Open your Apple Podcasts app, search for “iHeart True Crime+, and subscribe today!