I haven’t got a problem with Sunny Kaushal, but he was offering his ideas to the Government for free.
If someone offers you something for free and you then decide to pay for it, that is a bad deal.
And it’s not bad coin we’re paying either.
Sunny Kaushal is earning $920 a day.
Between March 1st and June 10th, which is 102 days, he earned $95,112.
He can claim up to $920 dollars a day.
Now my sums tell me that means he’s been working and claiming seven days a week. For 102 days straight.
Nearly $100,000 for three months work ain’t bad.
Then there's the personnel cost of $330,000 for, what Sunny told us yesterday, lawyers and policy work.
That's work which can mostly be done in-house by Government departments and ministerial offices, who do this all the time, and have probably already done work on some of the ideas pitched by the retail crime fighting unit.
Frankly, at the cost of $330,000 I think we can all see someone’s taking the mickey with their bills.
Now, if you are offered something for free, why would you pay for it?
That’s how the Government gravy train works.
Good for Sunny Kaushal. If I was offered that much money by the Government for doing what I was already doing, I would take it.
But I expected better from National, given that we are broke and they are supposed to be careful with money.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show HERE - where this article was sourced.
3 comments:
You are on the money Heather. I suspect that those within Government that have been gorging themselves on similar fees, were concerned that Sunny Kaushal’s offer of free ideas could threaten their own greed. Governments come and governments go but their wasteful spending defies their promises.
That’s very poor value for money. Whoever approved it needs a talking to.
I think you are asking the wrong questions. The numbers alone are not telling us anything, the real question should be what do we get for this money? A lot or a little? And, btw, things that are offered for free are not necessarily of good value.
Post a Comment