Two stories.
This one (Sun, 21 Jun 2009 9:01p.m):
Bob McCoskrie, director of Family First NZ which is leading the “vote no” campaign, said Ms Rankin had not expressed any concerns about being involved.
“She’s got freedom to speak out on it,” he told NZPA.
And this one (Mon, 22 Jun 2009 5:16a.m.):
Family First director Bob McCoskrie had advised earlier this evening that Ms Rankin would be the Family and Child Trust (Fact) representative at the launch but that was later changed to Bev Adair.
Ms Rankin had told the minister that Mr McCoskrie had made a mistake, and Ms Bennett was satisfied with that explanation, the spokeswoman said.
Mr McCoskrie told NZPA Ms Rankin was “part of Fact but Bev is the spokesperson on it”.
“So it was just my error. I should have put Bev’s name, not Christine’s name.”
Now come on Bob, you may expect people to believe there are all these instances of good parents being prosecuted for smacking their kids that you can’t or won’t front any evidence to support, but surely you don’t expect us to believe that.
How would you have been able to say Rankin had not expressed any concerns about being involved and that she had the freedom to speak out if it was just all a mistake involving you getting the name wrong?
Phone running hot last night perchance?
g.blog 
Rankin, McCroskrie, Bennett – clowns!
Oh and Garrett, – loon!
Toad
Its an eminently sensible arrangement, shes a commissioner now.
besides which are you saying bev Adair hasn’t put in the hard yards?
remember most of us think only Labour, Maori and the Greens Parties would allow their people to serve on both at the same time and claim impartiality;-)
MikeNZ – the point I am making is the bullshit excuse from McCoskrie about the change of the keynote speaker.
Of course Rankin shouldn’t have fronted it. But everything indicates that she was going to until someone (Paula Bennett?) intervened.
Bad judgment by Rankin, and then McCoskrie ends up being the fall guy who makes a media statement explaining the change of frontperson that is patently lacking in credibility.
@ toad – you mean an explanation lacking credibility like when Mike Ward had to explain how he ‘now saw the light’ and was stepping aside for Russell to be a Green MP?
Sorry, had to bite – the apple was too tempting 😉
Seriously, there should always be the ability for public servants to speak their opinion on any matter, distinct from their job role. It’s just a matter of discretion and careful diplomacy. Which admittedly, Rankin seems to lack a bit of 🙂
In this case, Ranking maybe should not front campaigns on S59, but she should be able to speak her mind freely (as an individual) in interviews, and even her take on S59 in the context of her work as Families Commissioner – so long as she makes clear that her personal position differs from the official position of the Commission.
Kinda like the Alliance party agreement to agree/differ when in government was supposed to let Laila Harre speak with striking workers, when Labour didn’t want a bar of it.
Pingback: Own goals « g.blog