Hughes Darren: Appointments — Chief Ombudsman and Ombudsman 
Hughes Darren: Appointments — Chief Ombudsman and Ombudsman 
[Volume:660;Page:9110] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
: 
 The Labour Opposition is in support of the motion moved by the Leader of the House to reappoint Beverley Anne Wakem CBE of Wellington for a further term as Ombudsman and also to continue in her role as Chief Ombudsman. The Leader of the House has outlined the important traditions of this job and we greatly respect and value the independence of the Office of the Ombudsmen. It is a remarkably important job in our country and in our system of constitutional arrangements which are of course not written so conventions of jobs and positions such as these are very very important. New Zealand took on the role of having an Ombudsman in the early 1960s from Scandinavia and since that time the people who have filled those positions have acted with great honour and integrity and have reinforced the decision of the New Zealand Government to set up such an office. As noted by Palmer and Palmer in their book  
Bridled Power 
 Ombudsmen are Parliament’s people; they are separate from the executive branch of Government and that is absolutely crucial. They are appointed by the Officers of Parliament Committee. Their budget is set independently of the executive Government. It is determined by the Officers of Parliament Committee which is chaired by the Speaker and for which unanimity or near-unanimity is required in order for decisions to be taken around both the appointment and funding of that office. 
In our system of Government even under proportional representation it is very important for the Opposition to be able to rely on both the Official Information Act and questions for written answer in order to elucidate information from the executive Government to fulfil the Opposition’s constitutional duty to hold the Government of the day to account and to have the ability to propose new ideas for the country to consider. Where there are disputes between the executive Government and the Opposition the fall-back mechanism that the Opposition has is obviously the Speaker in the first instance in respect of questions for written answer and second the Office of the Ombudsmen for Official Information Act requests where there is disagreement between a particular Minister’s office or department and a member of Parliament who is seeking that information. 
So the Opposition not only values but relies on the unrelenting professionalism with which the Office of the Ombudsmen deals with our requests and complaints from time to time as they occur. We know that it is a very heavy workload. There are many calls on the time of the Ombudsmen and from time to time over the years the Office of the Ombudsmen in reporting to the Officers of Parliament Committee has made the point that for example the area of advocacy or recourse that prisoners have is often through the Office of the Ombudsmen and that is a very heavy workload for the Ombudsmen to deal with. 
There are members of the public who take up issues with the Ombudsman if their Official Information Act request is considered not to have been taken in the manner in which the applicant would have liked. As I mentioned before Opposition MPs through the course of time have regularly used that as a reference point for areas where there has been disagreement. It might be possible or tempting for the Office of the Ombudsmen to occasionally look upon requests from the Opposition as a lower priority than those of other members of society. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: No no no no. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: My colleagues are saying “No no no” and I am sure they are right. We believe that one of the fundamental aspects of the regime is that any New Zealander can take a complaint to the Ombudsman and that things that come in from Opposition members of Parliament are as important as those that come in from any member of the public. There is no hierarchy of requests. This is an office that acts for everybody. I think the fact that so many other agencies even some in the private sector have looked to use the term “ombudsman” for resolution of their own complaints process shows just the integrity with which this office has earned its place in our constitutional affairs since 1962. 
Beverley Wakem is a thoroughly decent and hard-working person of great integrity. We welcome her reappointment to the role. We look forward to working with her following in the footsteps as she does of many distinguished New Zealanders—principally of course the late John Belgrave who served with great honour and distinction and who sadly passed away in 2008. It is a moment to remember those who have held the job but also for the House to come together and wish Beverley Wakem and her team well—particularly her seeing this motion refers directly to her appointment—for the important role they fulfil. I am sure she will continue to be Parliament’s person and her office will continue to be Parliament’s people as we have come to expect because that is fundamental to the business of our Government in New Zealand.