Why did SSC take no action re non legal actions at MSD between Social Security Appeal Authority ruling and High Court confirmation false names are not legal and not permitted?
From: Gregory Soar
Dear State Services Commission,
As my previous request was refused for citing CRIMINAL ACTIONS at MSD I make it again not referring to Criminal Actions.
(Note my protest that the response given by SSC re High Court made no mention of Crimes as being correct BUT OUR CRIMES ACT 1961 clearly does and does not require a court to first mention crimes. Indeed if a court were first required to mention crimes before any prosecution is sought then MSD could itself never prosecute a crime as alleged? That is a double standard should that situation exist and that it does not exist is the only acceptable answer. We have a whole Act which outlines when prosecutions should proceed with the two main ones being PUBLIC INTEREST and LIKELIHOOD OF SECURING CONVICTION.)
The State Sector Act 1988:
1A(c) maintains appropriate standards of integrity and conduct;
4A(c) identifying and developing high-calibre leaders
4A(d) working with State services leaders to ensure that the State services maintain high standards of integrity and conduct and are led well and are trusted;
4A(h) supporting the efficient, effective, and economical achievement of good outcomes by the State services
1. Why did the State Services Commissioner take no action to stop actions ruled as NOT LEGAL by the Social Security Appeal Authority until a later High Court defence? The non legal actions should have been made to stop until a higher Court defence was won. I refer use of false names on legal official documents.
2. Under what legal authority did the State Services Commissioner take no action to end ruled non legal activities at the MSD post the Social Security Appeal Authority considering it is his legislated duty as defined herein by the State Sector Act 1988?
3. How does the State Services Commissioner, having taken no action once the Social Security Appeal Authority had ruled current actions as NOT LEGAL fulfill the legal requirement of the State Sector Act sections by taking no action aswas legally required by the State Sector Act?
4. How does the State Services Commissioner feel he upholds public confidence as required by having taken no action to end non legal activities once so ruled by the Social Security Appeal Authority?
From: SSC Enquiries
State Services Commission
Dear Mr Soar
Official Information Request
I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your OIA request dated 15 January
We will endeavour to respond to your request as soon as possible and in
any event no later than are 20 working days after the day your request was
received. If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will
notify you of an extension of that timeframe.
If you have any queries, please feel free to contact Ministerial Services
at [email address]. If any additional factors come to
light which are relevant to your request, please do not hesitate to
contact us so that these can be taken into account.
Our letter notifying you of our decision on your request will confirm if
we intend to publish the letter (with your personal details removed) and
any related documents on the State Services Commission’s website.
State Services Commission | Te Kawa Mataaho
www.ssc.govt.nz | www.govt.nz
From: Ministerial Services
State Services Commission
Good afternoon Mr Soar
Official Information Requests
Our Ref: SSCOIA 2019-0006 and SSCOIA 2019-0007
We refer to your official information requests dated 12 January 2019 and
15 January 2019 where you have asked several questions that relate to the
Ministry of Social Development’s previous Chief Executive, Mr Brendon
Boyle and a recent High Court decision on the use of pseudonyms.
The Official Information Act 1982 requires that we advise you of our
decision on your request no later than 20 working days after the day that
we received your request. Unfortunately, it will not be possible to meet
that time limit and we are, therefore, writing to notify you of an
extension of the time to make our decision, to 27 February 2019.
We will keep you updated on the progress of our response to your request.
This extension is necessary because consultations needed to make a
decision on your request are such that a proper response cannot reasonably
be made within the original time limit.
If you wish to discuss any aspect of your request with us, including this
decision, please feel free to contact Ministerial Services at
You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
this decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.
State Ministerial Services
Services State Services Commission | Te Kawa Mataaho
Commission www.ssc.govt.nz | www.govt.nz
If you have received this message in error please notify the sender
immediately and then delete this message along with any attachments.
Please treat the contents of this message as private and in confidence.
1. mailto:[email address]
From: Gregory Soar
Dear Ministerial Services,
I appreciate the update thank you.