It is interesting that we are entering an era of “closed-from-information” approach from the CDHB.
I was informed, by a number of people, that the CDHB Board had received a final report from EY, which was commissioned by the Board, on the CDHB finances. The executive of the DHB was requested to provide a response to this EY report. However, I wonder if the Board wants to bury both the report, and the DHB Executive response.
So, I completed the following OIA the following from the DHB:
Could you please supply:
- A copy of the final EY report tabled / presented to the Board and/or QFARC between June – September 2020
- A copy of the Executive Management Team response to the EY report tabled / presented to the Board and or QFARC between June – September 2020
I received a response, within three days. This was a very fast turnaround time for an OIA. The response declined to release both documents. The fascinating issue was the EY Report had already been referred to in the OIA release from Treasury, and had been used to brief Chris Hipkins when he visited the CDHB.
Unfortunately for the CDHB Board, I had already read both the EY Report and the DHB Executive response. I was just testing them out. I can understand why the Board would want these documents to disappear, or at least for the EY report to be modified. I shall read the EY report when I receive an official copy, and compare it with the original. It will be fascinating to see if EY responds to pressure and lowers its ethical standards to comply with the unreasonable demands of the organisation which pays its fees; or will it stick with its original mistakes?
Both reports give a very clear insight as to why so many of the DHB Executive left. I will print the reports at a later date.
Just to give you a sense of what was contained in the Executive response to the EY Report I have included the first two sentences from the Executive response to give you a sense of the clarity of the advice that the DHB Executive gave to the Board:
“There are a number of errors of fact, errors of analysis and omissions which mean the Board should not rely on this report for financial decision making. In the following pages we will highlight the most significant issues.”
It does raise a very serious question as to just what advice the Board and officials are providing to their Minister. It does also reinforce my personal opinion that its’ time public authorities stopped engaging the big 4 accounting firms to supply analysis. If you want to challenge my opinion read the book “Bean Counters”. Here’s what has been written about this book:
The world’s ‘Big Four’ accountancy firms – PwC, Deloitte, Ernst & Young, and KPMG – have become a gilded elite. How has the seemingly humdrum profession of accountancy got to this level? And what is the price we pay for their excesses?
Leading investigative journalist Richard Brooks charts the profession’s rise to global influence and offers a gripping exposé of the accountancy industry. From underpinning global tax avoidance to corrupting world football, Bean Counters reveals how the accountants have used their central role in the economy to sell management consultancy services that send billions in fees its way. A compelling history informed by numerous insider interviews, this is essential reading for anyone interested in how our economy works and the future of accountancy.
I’ve got a copy if somebody wants to borrow it.
I’m continuing to collect information, which is leaking out of CDHB like a torrent. People are seriously concerned about the way this organisation is currently being managed. They are also worried about the quality of advice the Minister is receiving from both the Board, the Crown Monitor and the Ministry of Health. The Tuesday Club continues to monitor a Board which deserves close attention.
Somebody pointed something out to me about my last Tuesday Club notes that the Minister of Health’s office has delayed replying to one of my OIA’s until the 5th of November. I hadn’t remembered that this was the date of the last person to enter Parliament with honest intent.
Leave a Reply