Travel for government is an absolute necessity, that much is true, but it should never be treated as a blank cheque, without public scrutiny and a scrutiny balanced against the many pressing priorities a community faces, writes Thomas Tarurongo Wynne.

When my mother and father were in hospital with dengue fever, we knew we had to take water and blankets for them, and one for a papa of ours who was lying in another bed. We knew that the budget for the hospital was tight, and they were trying to make the most of what they had and be resourceful. Because that’s what a limited budget does, it causes people to be resourceful and not spend as if there is an endless supply of money.

When I worked at Tereora College, if I remember correctly, its operating budget was around $100,000 to now $144,000 a year, with close to half on the power bill to just keep the lights on. Often, we would ration photocopying, and rely on parents helping where there was a budget shortfall, because as usual, the answer back from agency was ‘we simply don’t have any more money’.

At Araura College, similar constraints with a much smaller operating budget, supplemented by fundraising and the resourcefulness of teachers, students and management. We learn living at home, that money is tight, and that we all need to pitch in and be resourceful with what we have.

Governments manage country budgets, and I have worked in several budgets here in Aotearoa, as well as the organisation of Ministers trips overseas. The level of justification for any trip was high as was the need for these trips to meet clear and definite country priorities. There was a high level of scrutiny from the Prime Minister’s Office in New Zealand, that trips, were fit for purpose and could show clear and definite delivery of good for the country.

More often the answer was no, and that was because trips to places like Mongolia, or Brussels for regional meetings or other parts of the world were simply not in the best interests of the country or met the public scrutiny or justification.

We were always cognisant that this was public money, public time and in the public’s interests first. Just because there was an invitation to travel and it was within what was permitted, this did not mean it was right or when balanced against the pressures of the day.

Therefore, justifying a decision, action, or expenditure solely because it is lawful does not mean it is also the right decision.

The Bible addresses this idea of what we call expediency, particularly in the teachings of the Apostle Paul. In 1 Corinthians 6:12, Paul writes, “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are beneficial or expedient. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be dominated by anything.” This verse underscores the idea that just because something is permitted, legal or allowed, does not also mean it is beneficial or morally right – or when we consider all circumstances the right choice to make.

The means does not justify the ends. We must never allow the justification of any act simply because it is lawful or within the bounds of the law.

Decisions, grounded in a deep sense of right and wrong, not only shape the course of history but also provide enduring lessons on principled leadership. These leaders remind us that true progress and justice are achieved by staying true to what is right, regardless of the cost or the supposed benefit.

Travel for government is an absolute necessity, that much is true, but it should never be treated as a blank cheque, without public scrutiny and a scrutiny balanced against the many pressing priorities a community faces, like Police, Health, Education Infrastructure and wellbeing.

The scrutiny should not be on the report back once the travel has commenced. It should be well before the flights are booked and bags are packed for wherever in the world that may be – and clearly, what the benefit is to our tax paying citizens – before you leave and not after. Just because it is lawful, does not mean it is right.