So we all though Ken Henry resigned from government and then got a job in the PMs office. Well I found this in Hansard.
Senator CORMANN: We will explore these things during the course of Treasury estimates. Secretary, I would love to explore this with you longer, but I gather that your time here is very limited. So I have a separate question in relation to Dr Henry. Is Dr Henry contracted by Treasury to provide services to Treasury?
Dr Parkinson: No.
Senator CORMANN: He is not?
Dr Parkinson: No. He is on leave.
Senator CORMANN: I am sorry?
Dr Parkinson: He was on leave and now he has been appointed to a position by the Prime Minister.
Senator CORMANN: He has been appointed to a position by the Prime Minister?
Dr Parkinson: Yes.
Senator CORMANN: So that is not through Treasury, then?
Dr Parkinson: No.
Senator CORMANN: When you say that he is on leave, he is actually still on your books?
Dr Parkinson: No. He was on leave and then he was appointed to a position.
Senator CORMANN: Until when? When did his leave finish?
Dr Parkinson: I do not know.
So a person with a half-million dollar salary coming out of your departmental budget is on leave before retirement and you don’t know when it ended?
But the plot thickens.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard invoked a rarely used section of the constitution to re-hire former Treasury secretary Ken Henry.
Ms Gillard announced last week the Government had appointed DrHenry as a part-time ”special adviser” to her portfolio, adding she was yet to finalise the details of his role.Her office confirmed yesterday the economist had been hired neither as a public servant, a political adviser nor as a consultant. Instead, he was employed under section 67 of the constitution, which allows governors-general to appoint government officers directly.
A spokeswoman for Ms Gillard also said Dr Henry would retain the $523,860-a-year salary package he had as Treasury secretary, but on a prorata basis.
Section 67 states
Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the appointment and removal of all other officers of the Executive Government of the Commonwealth shall be vested in the Governor-General in Council, unless the appointment is delegated by the Governor-General in Council or by a law of the Commonwealth to some other authority.
So what all does this mean? Not only is Henry back – he never left. The manner of his appointment seems unusual – obviously the government didn’t need to advertise, or create a position. Perhaps it is to avoid limitations on advisor numbers, or to ensure his salary is paid by the taxpayer and not the Labor Party, or even to avoid being summonsed by the Senate to appear at estimates.
Ms Gillard’s office would not say yesterday why the Government opted to employ Dr Henry in such a way.
Any advances on those possibilities?
Henry is the bitch’s bitch.
Steve of Ferny Hills
8 Jun 11 at 9:46 pm
So who does Henry work for? Gillard or the public service?
daddy dave
8 Jun 11 at 10:04 pm
Just for starters, the Henry Tax Report (2009) showed Henry was totally unaware (1) that he presided over a Company Tax regime that taxed all mining and petroleum companies at 30% of taxable profits, (2) that indeed all mining and petroleum companies paid tax at close to that rate, (3) that the Australian Tax Office over which he presided shows that mining and petroleum companies actually did pay taxes at that rate (less a few minor tax offsets that he himself provided); (4) that so-called company tax at 30% of taxable profits is not a tax on companies, as they do not have a homo sapiens existence, but is actually a withholding tax on their shareholders, of whom I am one, so that actually the company tax rate on me is 47.5%, not 30%, as I incur tax at 47.5% on my income above the relevant threshold less tax paid on my behalf by companies at the company tax rate of which Henry (and all the 21 half-witted Australian economists who supported the claims) are unaware. It is indeed remarkable that without exception it appears no Australian economists are aware that company tax is a withholding tax.
(Slightly edited. Tim if you make specific claims about individuals like that please provide links. Sinc]
Tim Curtin
8 Jun 11 at 10:07 pm
That is the nature of state control of thought. Stage 1 is when the tell-me-what -I-want-to-hear types get kudos, jobs, high salaries.
Stage 2 is well I’ll tell yous about that later.
coz
8 Jun 11 at 10:09 pm
Treasury has made it clear that it’s the Labor Parties private accounting firm.
Abbott’s got a lot of clearing out to do if he gets elected: ABC, Treasury, stacked asylum seeker committees for starters.
He should just move the government to Perth and start over.
twostix
8 Jun 11 at 10:21 pm
Does Henry still retain his security pass for the Treasury building, or does he now have two passes : one for Treasury, one for Parliament House ?
I wouldn’t want to be in Parkinson’s shoes. He could quickly become the fall guy.
Effectively, it sounds like Henry is a permanent head without a department, free to roam and interfere at will. He’ll probably be brow beating ministers inside three months.
500 grand a year ? Not worth it.
No Worries
8 Jun 11 at 10:37 pm
There is a place to save 500,000 pa straight up (with reference to the That’s What We Did thread). Plus on costs and expenses.
Rafe
8 Jun 11 at 10:50 pm
Is his job worth 500k a year outside of the APS?
twostix
8 Jun 11 at 10:53 pm
He is probably good with kangaroos and small furry animals.
Rafe
8 Jun 11 at 10:55 pm
“He should just move the government to Perth and start over.”
What, and completely destroy the entire WA economy?
Better to keep it in Canberra – a much smaller opportunity cost.
Milton Von Smith
8 Jun 11 at 11:16 pm
I would have thought an appointment under that provision would be unconstitutional. It starts ‘until the Parliament otherwise provides’ which it has through eg the Public Service Act.
Samuel J
9 Jun 11 at 7:19 am
[...] As Sinclair wrote on 8 June it appears that the Government has appointed Ken Henry under section 67 of the Australian Constitution although I have not yet seen the Government Gazette notice signed by the Governor-General. [...]
Constitutionality of the Ken Henry appointment at Catallaxy Files
10 Jun 11 at 9:29 pm
Also, what appropriation is he being paid out of? PM&C? Treasury? Other?
I kind of understand though. I could never see Ken Henry either obeying the Public Service Act 1999 or trying to make a profit in the private sector.
Voodoo
11 Jun 11 at 9:33 am