Ps apr 14 final all web

April 2014 Public Sector 1

J o u r n a l o f t h e I n s t i t u t e o f P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n N e w Z e a l a n d

Rāngai Tūmatanui

Public Sector is printed on an economically and environmentally responsible paper sourced from internationally certified Well Managed Forests and manufactured with EMAS accreditation (ISO 14001).

C O N T E N T SPresident’s message: Free and frank advice in the Information Age? by John Larkindale ....................................................................................................2

IPANZ news ...........................................................................................................2–3

Guest editorial: The role of auditing in maintaining integrity in the public sector by Lyn Provost ..........................................................................4

COVER STORY Building integrity: Assessing the pillars of New Zealand’s national integrity system .....................................................................................5–9

Project Compass points IPONZ in the right direction .................................. 10–11

From vision to reality – building an integrated health system in Canterbury ..................................................................................................12–14

Learning for high performance ....................................................................... 15–17

Connecting the dots – Joined-up Justice ......................................................18–19

Counting to the future ....................................................................................20–21

Time for a rethink? .........................................................................................22–23

Point of view: Culture of integrity by Phil O’Reilly ................................................ 24

Front cover image: Pillars in verandah © Dr Ajay Kumar Singh | Dreamstime.com

PUBLISHERThe Institute of Public Administration New ZealandPO Box 5032, Wellington, New Zealand Phone: +64 4 463 6940, Fax: +64 4 463 6939 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ipanz.org.nzISSN 0110-5191 (Print)ISSN 1176-9831 (Online)The whole of the literary matter of Public Sector is copyright. Please contact the editor if you are interested in reproducing any Public Sector content.EDITORShelly Farr Biswell: [email protected] BillingtonBriar EdmondsJohn LarkindaleMargaret McLachlanKathy OmblerPhil O’ReillyLyn ProvostPROOFREADERSNikki Crutchley Rose NorthcottJOURNAL ADVISORY GROUPLen Cook Chris Eichbaum, ChairSusan HitchinerJohn LarkindaleJulian LightMargaret McLachlan Ross TannerADVERTISINGPhone: +64 4 463 6940 Fax: +64 4 463 6939 Email: [email protected]&K DesignPRINTINGLithoprintSCOPEIPANZ is committed to promoting informed debate on issues already significant in the way New Zealanders govern themselves, or which are emerging as issues calling for decisions on what sorts of laws and management New Zealanders are prepared to accept. INFORMATION FOR AUTHORSPublic Sector considers contributions for each issue. Please contact the journal’s editor for more information.SUBSCRIPTIONSIPANZ welcomes both corporate and individual membership and journal subscriptions. Please email [email protected], phone +64 4 463 6940 or visit www.ipanz.org.nz to register online.DISCLAIMEROpinions expressed in Public Sector are those of various authors and do not necessarily represent those of the editor, the journal advisory group or IPANZ. Every effort is made to provide accurate and fac-tual content. The publishers and editorial staff, however, cannot accept responsibility for any inadvertent errors or omissions that may occur.

Counting to the future

20–21

Project Compass points IPONZ in the

right direction 1O–11

Connecting the dots – Joined-up Justice

18–19

V o l u m e 3 7 : 1 A p r i l 2 0 1 4

http://www.ipanz.org.nz

2 Public Sector April 2014

For more than a century, New Zealand has been well served by its public service. The forefa-thers of today’s politicians who in

the Public Service Act 1912 recognised the need for an apolitical public service, recruited on the basis of ability and remu-nerated on a standard scale, laid the foun-dations for New Zealand’s enviable and globally recognised reputation for probity and lack of corruption.

This reputation has been hard-won, but can be easily lost. It must not be taken as an enduring natural property of the New Zealand psyche. We all need to be vigilant and ensure that the fundamen-tal principles and practices that underpin our system of government continue to be understood and valued.

Probity, lack of corruption, and appoint-ment on merit are necessary conditions for integrity in public administration, but they are not sufficient conditions. In particular, it is important that every government of the day has access to the full range of informa-tion about issues on which decisions are to be made.

In practical terms, that puts weight on the need for ministers to receive – and be open to – frank and full advice from their advisers. Ministers must be given a full range of options from which to choose, all such options being set in an appropriate context of risks and opportunities, advan-tages and drawbacks. Ministers have the right to make whatever decision they think fit on the basis of this information, and offi-cials must then proceed to implement the minister’s directions. But just as lawyers

can go back to Hansard to check on the intent of Parliament in passing a particular piece of legislation, so should there be a full audit trail recording the basis on which ministerial decisions are taken.

Primary responsibility for provid-ing full and frank advice rests with the public service. But – and this is where the Information Age has been a real game-changer – governments can today no longer seek to rely solely on the public service; ministers can, will, and should receive advice from a multitude of sources. This requires the public service to take on an additional role, namely to evaluate the quality of external material and to advise on its accuracy, relevance, practicability and cost-effectiveness.

Policy development today is more complex than it was 20 or more years ago. It requires input from more people and more organisations and institutions. It also requires robust discussion and debate, both internal and external, for any given organisation.

It accordingly disturbs me that in her report to the State Services Commissioner on the 2012 leaks in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Paula Rebstock takes the position that the debate engen-dered by two senior members of staff in MFAT (neither of whom are accused of having leaked any material to media or elsewhere outside MFAT) was inappropri-ate. [Disclosure: I was employed by MFAT for close to 40 years and I know well the two staffers concerned.] They, like a number of other senior staff, had well-founded concerns about the likely negative

impact of proposed organisation and struc-tural changes in MFAT on New Zealand’s ability to implement the Government’s foreign policy agenda. They sought to ensure that these probable consequences were fully understood and the proposals amended (or withdrawn) or, at the very least, that those making key decisions were fully aware of the perceived negative consequences of proceeding.

New Zealand will not be served well if internal debate is discouraged and a ‘from the top’ military style command-and-control approach is taken to policy development.

The complexity of today’s issues means too that policy development (and imple-mentation) is inevitably more costly. Today, it is more important than ever that the public sector is cost conscious and can be seen by voters to be using the resources available efficiently and in accord with agreed priorities. Public profligacy breeds lack of trust in government and the public service. If voters don’t believe they are getting reasonable value for their taxes, they will increasingly seek to avoid paying them and nothing is more likely to erode New Zealand’s reputation for probity and good governance.

Allow me to end on a very different note. Not all those elected to the IPANZ Board at last year’s AGM plan to stand again this year. I encourage you to consider stand-ing for election at the AGM in July. It is not a particularly onerous task, with around six or so meetings a year to attend. Your organisation is a growing organisation with an expanding membership and new blood and new ideas will be very welcome.

IPANZ New Professionals ConferenceOn 7 and 8 August 2014, the biennial New Professionals Conference will be held in Wellington on the theme of “Navigating Change – equipping new professionals for the future”.

Some of the concepts that will be explored at the conference include: • New Zealand’s response to global change

and trends – economic, social, technological, commercial and geo-political

• navigating global and local change as a new professional

• current issues in New Zealand that may have a long-term impact

• what the public sector – and its employees – of the future will look like.Speakers will include current and former public

servants, researchers, and relevant industry experts from the private sector. An evening social function on day one and a breakfast talk on day two will be among the opportunities for networking. www.ipanz.org.nz/npconference

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

Free and frank advice in the Information Age?By IPANZ President John Larkindale

http://www.ipanz.org.nz/npconference


By MARGARET MCLACHLAN IPANZ communications adviser

The customer comes first, the Deputy Prime Minister Bill English told an audience of over

200 public servants at the first IPANZ event of the year.

“We should be asking: Do we really understand the nature of our interaction with the general public, and our customers? Do we really understand how the behaviour of public institutions impacts on those people, and have we asked them?”

He outlined a set of reforms for the public service over the next five years. The key elements of the reforms are:• a growing focus on clients and customers• understanding what value public servants are

adding and achieving for the wider community and forging a greater link between resources and achievement

• the need for feedback from the public • public servants acting more like a network than

a hierarchy. “We need to maintain vertical accountability

(within organisations) while meeting the needs of the public,” he said.

English said public service budgets would stay tight, in part because “people have to think harder about what they’re doing and why”. He added that the public service had some complex problems to solve.

“There isn’t an expert who has all the answers. Actually, there’s us, trying our best to devise solutions… We need to unlock front-line knowledge and we need to unlock what our customers already know, and keep learning from them.”

One example of useful feedback was the error-plagued Novopay education payroll system. English described this as “our largest and most

useful failure” that provided valuable lessons for the current revamp of the Inland Revenue Department’s systems.

English said he was optimistic about the public sector: it had achieved a lot in the last five years, and was resilient in the face of tight budgets and uncertainty. Many of the achievements measured in the Better Public Services targets were as a result of the improved performance of the public sector. Minister English’s full speech is available at

www.ipanz.org.nz.

Annual IPANZ address by Hon Bill English

IPANZ news

Hon Bill English, Deputy Prime Minister: “We need to unlock front-line knowledge and we need to unlock what our customers already know, and keep learning from them.”

2014 IPANZ GEN-I PUBLIC SECTOR EXCELLENCE AWARDS Wednesday 2 July | Wellington | www.ipanz.org.nz/excellenceawards

IPANZ Board members wantedAnyone with an interest in the aims of IPANZ could consider becoming a member of the IPANZ Board. The Board and officers are elected annually at the IPANZ Annual General Meeting to be held in July (date to be advised). • The current list of Board

members can be seen at: www.ipanz.org.nz > About Us > Board.

• Please request nomination by a current IPANZ member and forward to the IPANZ office two weeks before the AGM.

• A nomination form is available at: www.ipanz.org.nz > About Us > Corporate Documents.

Looking for a Policy Job? Looking for Policy Talent?

As New Zealand’s only specialist public sector recruitment firm we have the expertise, the relationships and the know-how to find you the right job and the right talent every single time!

Vist: www.thejohnsongroup.co.nz or phone 04 473 6699.

YOUR FIRST CHOICE FORPUBLIC SECTOR PROFESSIONALS





https://www.ipanz.org.nz/Category?Action=View&Category_id=44

https://www.ipanz.org.nz/Category?Action=View&Category_id=116


GUEST EDITORIAL

The role of auditing in maintaining integrity in the public sectorBy Lyn Provost, Controller and Auditor-General

Louis Brandeis was not an Auditor-General. He was an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to 1939 and was

known as the Robin Hood of Law. He once said in a letter to his fiancée: “If the broad light of day could be let in upon men’s actions, it would purify them as the sun disinfects.” Twenty years later, in a 1913 Harper’s Weekly article, he elaborated on that comment stating, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants”.

Why am I writing about Mr Brandeis and his now-famous quote? Well, often that quote is used by members of the public, politicians, journalists, and bloggers when they write about my work. In the most simplified terms, as Auditor-General, I am using ‘sunlight’, with the tool of auditing, to strengthen accountability, integrity, and transparency in the public sector.

Auditing is my stock-in-trade, and it has been an important part of New Zealand’s checks and balances since 1842. The work of the Office of the Auditor-General gives the public, Parliament, and public organi-sations independent assurance that public entities are operating, and accounting for their performance, in keeping with the intentions of elected representatives.

Almost every public entity is required to have its annual financial statements audited and, if applicable, its performance information too. There are about 4000 public entities, including, for example, government departments, state-owned enterprises, Crown research institutes, the Defence Force, district health boards, city and district councils and the entities they own, schools, universities, polytechnics, and wānanga.

My auditors have ongoing contact with

the governors, managers, and staff work-ing in the public sector. This gives my Office a unique and independent insight into the workings of our country’s public sector.

Independence is the cornerstone of my Office. As an officer of Parliament, the Auditor-General is independent of the exec-utive government. This means that I cannot be directed by the government of the day. I am, however, accountable to Parliament for how I use public funds to carry out my work.

This approach, as set out in the Public Audit Act 2001, ensures that the Auditor-General’s reports and views about the use of public money are objective and free from political influence. Having an impar-tial, independent ‘public watchdog’ to cast an eye over government resources is an important safeguard. My Office is envied by many other jurisdictions around the world because of our statutory independence.

Even the fact that every public entity publishes their audited accounts is not the norm internationally. In fact, last year we were asked to present to a United Nations symposium on the timeliness of publish-ing audited financial statements. I take it for granted that this is the right thing to do but, as I reflect on what the New Zealand situation was at the start of my career, we have indeed come a long way.

My Office carried out a number of inquir-ies in 2012 and 2013, into matters includ-ing Kaipara’s wastewater scheme; citizen-ship decisions made by the then associate immigration minister; and the procurement process for the international convention centre in Auckland, otherwise known as the SkyCity inquiry.

In what has become increasingly complex and high-profile inquiry work, we

rarely find evidence of improper motive, collusion, or political interference in deci-sion-making. What we do see are oppor-tunities for improvements to governance and decision-making processes, and to transparency, that are often little more than common sense. Sadly, it seems that common sense is not always put into prac-tice. I will repeat a conclusion from one of my inquiry reports:

In our experience, accusations of wrongdoing flourish when there is a lack of information about what actually happened.

At the end of last year, New Zealand was again ranked by Transparency International as first equal out of 177 countries for anti-corruption perceptions. The Corruption Perceptions Index scores countries on a scale from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean). New Zealand’s score in 2013 was 91. We are also in the 90th percentile for all of the six 2012 World Bank’s Worldwide Governance indicators.

There are a number of factors in play as to why we have these scores. One is our general commitment to transparency as a nation; another is my Office’s abil-ity to use auditing and public reporting as the sunlight to give as much assurance as we are able to the public, Parliament, and public entities.

Integrity and transparency, in my opin-ion, go hand in hand. If the public service continues to commit to high levels of personal integrity and transparency, and takes care that the systems and behav-iours in their organisations support the achievement of these aims, the public will continue to benefit from that constant sunlight and enjoy a clear view.

The map to “Getting to Great”The State Services Commission has just released Getting to Great: Your map to navigating the straits of internal leadership. The report builds on a previous Getting to Great report which found that New Zealand has good public institutions that hold themselves to high standards of integrity and are adept at managing immediate issues, transactional stakeholder relationships, and the

priorities of governments of the day. The report contains tips from chief executives of agencies that did well on internal leadership in their Performance Improvement Framework reviews. It explores how and why they have been successful so other leaders across the state services can draw on their experiences and learn from them. www.ssc.govt.nz


Last year, Transparency International New Zealand took what in the building trades would be known as a structural assessment of the pillars of New Zealand’s national integrity system. The results of the assessment tell a generally positive story that our national integrity system “remains fundamentally strong”. But, while the contributors to the report found a “strengthening of transparency and accountability has occurred in some areas” since New Zealand’s first assessment in 2003, the system faces increasing challenges, and in important areas “passivity and complacency continue”. SHELLY FARR BISWELL learns about the perceptions, the reality, and the future of our national integrity system.

Transparency International has developed a National Integrity System assessment that is used as a litmus test for integrity by dozens of countries around the world.

Transparency International uses the following working definition for an NIS, “the institutions, laws, procedures, practices and attitudes that encourage and support integrity in the exercise of power”. The NIS is graphically represented as a Greek-style temple with a number of institutions, agencies or sectors as pillars upholding the system and a set of foundations in the norms, ethics and attitudes of the society.

To assess our country’s national integrity system, last year New Zealand researchers conducted the Integrity Plus 2013 New Zealand National Integrity System Assessment. The assessment looked across 12 pillars, including legislative, executive, judiciary, public sector, law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies, electoral management, ombudsman, audit institutions, political parties, media, civil society, and business.

As Co-Director of the 2013 assessment, Suzanne Snively says the plus part of the assessment comes through the integration of the Treaty of Waitangi as a foundation topic along with other social, political, economic, cultural and environmental underpinnings of our society and through widening the analysis of the pillars.

“Two foundations of particular significance are the Treaty of Waitangi and the environment. The treaty has been included because of its significance to our society and constitutional arrangements. The environment has been included because a well-governed society needs to be supported by sound environmental values and governance practices.”

Alex Matheson, lead writer for the legislature, executive, and public sector pillars for the 2013 assessment, explains, “This assessment does not aspire to be a comprehensive review of our constitutional arrangements, but it does seek to provide a clear picture of our governing processes in action. It also identifies the practical challenges we face as a society in terms of the separation of powers and roles of public actors, government transparency and accountability, and the state of integrity management in our main institutions.”

The good newsSuzanne Snively says there is much to celebrate in the assessment. “Our national integrity system remains fundamentally strong and we rate well against a range of transparency and governance indicators.”

She says highlights include the effectiveness of the judiciary as a check on executive action, the work of the Office of the Auditor-General, and the effectiveness of the Ombudsman.

“For me, the OAG particularly stands out for its willingness to think about ways to improve, its openness to criticism, and its willingness to openly disclose when mistakes are made. It truly is a brave and courageous organisation and sets the bar for other institutions.”

She says another strength identified through the assessment is the way the media, political parties, the OAG, law enforcement agencies, and the judiciary will usually pursue and endeavour to resolve cases of corruption or unethical behaviour when they are revealed. “If a real or perceived threat to integrity is exposed, it is quickly dealt with.”

Room for improvement Snively says one of the things that struck her once the assessment was underway, however, is that there is a tendency towards complacency when it

Build

ing i

nteg

rity

Assessing the pillars of New Zealand’s national integrity system

>


comes to maintaining our national integrity system. “There is this sense that ‘we’ve already done that’ so now we can get on with all of our other work. What people fail to recognise is that maintaining our national integrity system is absolutely key to ‘all the other work’.”

She says what researchers found is that many of the system’s greatest weaknesses go back to poor interactions between the pillars. “An example of this would be the interaction between the political executive and the public sector. There are many examples where there’s been an erosion of ‘free and frank advice’ to ministers.”

She says other interactions that are currently weak include the interface between political party finance and public funding, parliamentary oversight of the executive, and the dealings between central and local government.

“Transparency and integrity are two areas where you have got to do everything well if you want good results. It really is a case of the system only being as strong as your weakest link.”

To address current weaknesses, as well as to bolster areas where our system is already strong, the assessment includes a set of recommendations.

“We are already seeing uptake by sectors for some of these recommendations and our focus over the coming year will be to work with each sector to discuss how to implement necessary changes.”

Integrity – the bigger pictureAt a global level, Transparency International rightly uses control of corruption as a key indicator for integrity, but Alex Matheson says for strong democratic societies that’s only part of the picture.

“Low corruption is absolutely essential, but it’s not the only element in good public sector governance. Formal checks and balances, along with robust decision-making and accountability processes are critical for good governance.”

He says it’s an area of concern for New Zealand which has relatively informal constitutional arrangements compared to most other countries.

As constitutional law expert Dr Matthew Palmer has written, “three aspects of New Zealand cultural attitudes

to the exercise of public power are salient: egalitarianism, authoritarianism, and pragmatism. None of these attitudes support the constitutional norm of the rule of law and separation of powers in New Zealand, making that norm vulnerable”.

Matheson says Palmer’s observation is one he kept returning to through his research for the assessment. “While our informal approach has served us well in many ways, our underlying constitutional culture has, over time, produced a powerful political executive with few counterbalancing influences. International governance experience and some events in our recent history suggest that this situation has risks that require the ongoing watchfulness by citizens. MMP was intended to redress the imbalance by producing a more effective Parliament. Our report shows some improvement, but attaining that goal remains a work in progress.”

As summarised in the assessment report, “By developed country standards, there is a high concentration of power in the Cabinet, including over key appointments. At times, this creates public mistrust. There is some resistance (also in the public sector) to the spirit and intent of the Official Information Act 1982. Cabinet minister accountability for the effectiveness of policies is relatively weak.”

Matheson worked in the New Zealand public service for 25 years before spending 10 years in senior public governance and management advisory roles for two international organisations, the Commonwealth Secretariat in London and the OECD in Paris. On his return to New Zealand in 2005, one thing that struck him was our “small society” pre-disposition for hubris, with excessive confidence in our own ideas and the exceptionality of our governance arrangements. He says these characteristics are manifested in the suppression of dissenting views and in system-wide under-investment in evidence-based review and evaluation of policy outcomes.

“We boldly led the way for new public management in the 1980s, but became so entranced by our theories that we didn’t see the need to check their results. In this research we found a number of examples of what I would call faith-driven public policy-making.”

He gives the example of restructures in the public sector.

“Attentiveness, discourse and action are key if we want to live in a fair and equitable society that is free from corruption.”

Left: Suzanne Snively presenting to Treasury on the Corruption Perception Index 2013.

> Pilla

rs in

ver

enda

h ©

Dr A

jay

Kum

ar S

ingh

| D

ream

stim

e.co

m


Fighting fraud in the 21st century

Ian Tuke is an Associate Director for Deloitte New Zealand’s Forensic Team, serves on the TINZ Board and provided input into the 2013 assessment. He says that while

New Zealand continues to be a leader in anti-bribery, we are lagging behind when it comes to countering fraud.

“On the whole, New Zealanders are a very trusting bunch, but the downside to this is the lack of professional scepticism. What that means is that time and again we are contacted by both public and private sector employers about trusted, often senior-level employees who it turns out have been defrauding their place of employment.”

Tuke says the general definition of fraud means that someone is gaining personal benefit from their actions that typically causes loss to their employer with “a bit of deception thrown in”. He says that might mean taking lists of client names and details to use for personal benefit, or passing on procurement process details to help a vendor win a contract, or old-fashioned cooking the books – most often via false invoicing.

“Within the public sector we have seen a perception with some that because there aren’t individuals counting cash or making deposits at the bank that means the risk of fraud is pretty low. But when you think about it, the public sector is responsible for huge contracts and managing decisions that lead to benefits worth billions of dollars. Unfortunately, whenever you have that kind of money involved there is an inevitable risk of having some employees who are involved in illegal activity.”

The cost of fraud to organisations goes well beyond the financial, Tuke says. “There are reputational costs, productivity costs, and personal costs for those who worked with or managed the fraudster.”

He says about half of the Deloitte Forensic Team’s work is reactive – responding to fraud, typically perpetrated by employees – and the other half of their work is branded counter-fraud, helping employers put measures in place to stop fraud before it occurs.

He says in the past year, the team has seen a marked increase in the number of public agencies looking at ways to protect themselves against fraud and corruption risk.

“The Office of the Auditor-General has done a great job in elevating this subject. We have seen agencies move from burying their fraud policy on their intranet in a kind of ‘tick the box’ way to actually working to get policies, practices, controls and increased awareness in place that protect their agencies,” he says.

But New Zealand’s public sector has further to go. In Australia and numerous countries in the OECD, formal fraud

risk assessments are part of business as usual. “It requires a systematic prevention, detection and response approach through the organisation, and regular ‘what has changed for us’ check-ups.”

Tuke says what he and his team often see is that processes aren’t in place to facilitate the hard conversations that need to be had on this issue. “We find that it’s often a sizeable gap in an organisation’s approach. First, how hard is the business looking for fraud risk? Second, what is the level of understanding by employees what a red flag looks like? Third, what should an individual do to share their concerns with senior managers?”

He says the one question every chief executive should be able to answer is, “If one of your suppliers or your employees had a concern, how easy would it be for them to share that information with you today in a way they would feel safe?”

While assessing risk and putting measures in place

to deter fraud is not an absolute guarantee of not being deceived, it does mean irregularities are more likely to be picked up and dealt with much more quickly.

“When we go into an organisation we also make sure any counter-measures are positive and extremely visible which does send a strong signal to potential fraudsters that illegal behaviour is taken seriously across the organisation and that there are many sets of eyes and measures in place to provide a deterrent effect.”

With technologies changing at an extremely fast pace, Tuke says his team updates their technology every few months and is always on the lookout for how technologies can be used for illegal activities. “It’s an area that’s only going to become harder to monitor, so the sooner you have robust processes in place the less vulnerable your organisation will be.”

Ian Tuke, Associate Director, Forensic Team, Deloitte NZ: “The public sector is responsible for huge contracts and managing decisions that lead to benefits worth billions of dollars.”

...in the past year, the team has seen a marked increase in the number of public agencies looking at ways to protect themselves against fraud and corruption risk.


Alex Matheson: “We boldly led the way for new public management in the 1980s, but became so entranced by our theories that we didn’t see the need to check their results.”

“It began in the 1980s. I think everyone assumed at the time that restructuring was necessary because of the fundamental nature of other changes being made, but that with time things would settle down. Twenty-five years on and restructuring continues unabated. Over this period there has been no methodical effort to assess this dimension of machinery of government policy. Yet, there is mounting evidence that in key policy areas, the approach has been extremely destructive in terms of institutional knowledge and capacity.”

He says an even more important manifestation of faith-based policy-making and the lack of policy feedback has been in the development and implementation of regulatory policy.

“Over the last decade or so, regulatory deficiencies contributed to disastrous accidents, such as the Pike River mine tragedy, leaky buildings, and calamitous failures amongst financial institutions. Our report describes the strong actions now being taken to strengthen regulatory policy-making. The public can justifiably ask, however, why so much had to go wrong before our public sector recognised its systems were defective?”

Matheson adds that public sector leadership had been “blinkered” about the comparative quality of New Zealand’s version of public sector reform.

“It seems those in senior leadership positions recognised that changes had to be made, but were reticent about doing more than ‘tweaking’ things so that the ‘fundamentals aren’t changed’. This ingrained habit of genuflection towards the reforms of the 1980s and 90s has meant that our public sector has missed important cues to adjust.”

Matheson says an additional concern raised through the assessment is the legitimacy of local democracy.

“Despite its growing importance, local level democracy appears to have no constitutional protection. This was exemplified when in 2010, at the Government’s initiative, Parliament set aside the locally elected Environment Canterbury council for appointed commissioners without local consultation and without parliamentary select committee consideration.”

Matheson warns, “Good governance and public sector integrity go hand in hand, and in New Zealand that requires citizens to step up. We

System-level themesThe analysis of the 12 pillars and the societal foundations of the national integrity system identified six broader themes that cut generally across the whole system. The report identifies these system-level themes as characterising integrity in the exercise of authority in New Zealand.1. New Zealand has a strong culture of integrity,

with most decisions conforming to a high ethical standard, but this culture is coming under increasing pressure.

2. The relative structural dominance of the executive branch of government.

3. A lack of transparency is a concern in a number of areas.

4. The degree of formality in the frameworks that regulate the pillars in New Zealand’s national integrity system varies.

5. Conflicts of interest are not always well managed.

6. New Zealand would benefit from greater emphasis on prevention of fraud and corruption.

Overall themes and recommendations RecommendationsEach recommendation addresses an area of concern identified in the 2013 assessment and is directed to a particular institution or sector to implement.• A comprehensive national anti-corruption strategy, developed in

partnership with civil society and the business community, combined with rapid ratification of the UN Convention against Corruption.

• The government should develop, after wide public consultation, an ambitious cross-government national plan of action for the international Open Government Partnership.

• Transparency and integrity need to be strengthened in a range of priority areas, specifically with respect to Parliament, the political executive and local government.

• The integrity of the permanent public sector and its role in promoting integrity should be strengthened in a range of priority areas.

• The roles of key independent integrity agencies and bodies (the Electoral Commission, the judiciary, and the Ombudsman) should be supported, reinforced and improved.

• The business community, the media, and non-government organisations should take a much more proactive role in strengthening integrity systems and addressing the risks of corruption as “must-have” features of good governance.

• Public sector agencies should conduct further assessments and research in priority areas to strengthen integrity systems.

April 2014 Public Sector 9 April 2014 Public Sector 9

can’t simply think first-equal on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index means we have nothing to worry about. There are advantages in our non-legalistic and adaptable Kiwi-style governance arrangements, but these will only be realised insofar as they represent a wide and informed consensus. This requires vigilance about what we have and a continuing national conversation about the changes we need.”

A system-wide approachSuzanne Snively says while much of our national integrity system is truly world leading, society and our leaders need to take a more holistic view of integrity and transparency.

“Going back to that idea that many of our system’s weaknesses are actually found in the interactions between pillars, what the assessment shows is that while we are usually good at responding to issues as they arise we are not so good at putting systems in place that would stop those problems in the first place.”

She says the lack of transparency around political party financing is a good example of this.

“If we had systems in place that would ensure transparency, integrity and accountability there would be far fewer negative news headlines and public perception would improve. It’s a simple fix, but it will require all political parties to commit to real change.”

Still, Snively says there are positive signs that New Zealand will continue to lead the way in good governance and accountability. “One on one, private and public sector leaders are very engaged and open to discussion. The issue is taking it to the next level and getting people to continue to strive in this area.

“Ten years after the last assessment,

New Zealand continues to score well against a number of key indicators and there is much to commend it as one of the best nations in the world in terms of our strong accountability arrangements. But, and it’s a big but, our national integrity system faces some significant challenges, and there are a number of weaknesses that need urgent attention. Integrity and transparency underpin our democracy and our way of life. Attentiveness, discourse and action are key if we want to live in a fair and equitable society that is free from corruption.”

View the full report and supporting documentation at www.transparency.org.nz/2013/National-Integrity-System-Assessment-New-Zealand-2013.

...One of the key recommendations in the assessment is to “strengthen the transparency, integrity and accountability systems of Parliament, the political executive and local government”.


©© K

heng

Gua

n To

h |

Dre

amst

ime.

com

The Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand is ranked as having one of the most innovative intellectual property systems in the world, but it wasn’t always that way. Writer MARGARET MCLACHLAN discovers how a programme called Project Compass has transformed a business of ageing technology, and many paper-based transactions, into a 100 per cent online service.

IPONZ, which is part of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, has been recognised by the

World Intellectual Property Organization as having one of the most innovative intellectual prop-erty systems worldwide. IPONZ’s accolades include being a joint winner of the IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards for Improving Public Value through Business Transformation in 2013. According to IPONZ

National Manager Ingrid Bayliss, however, just five years ago IPONZ faced a number of seri-ous challenges.

“In 2009 we were using an end-of-life technology system and still relied on paper-based transactions for much of our work. We also had a high staff turnover and could foresee that new legislation and trade mark treaty obligations would drive more complex examina-tion processes. We could have taken the easy road and merely updated our existing systems, but we decided to be ambitious and think how best we could deliver to our clients.”

IPONZ kicked off ‘Project Compass’ as a whole-of-busi-ness transformation. By 2012, that transformation included the introduction of a highly auto-mated online service, a case management system, patent and trade mark law reform, and advanced searching tools for examiners.

With a busy workload, in any given month, IPONZ receives approximately 32 design, 175 patent and 660 trade mark applications.

Bayliss says, “Our clients include patent attorneys as well as ‘green’ start-up businesses. Working with clients through the transformation was critical because the new system funda-mentally changed the way they interact with us. Several client groups were involved in work-shops to help pilot the system. At the same time, new legislation

was being introduced, so regula-tion changes helped legitimise the business modifications.

IPONZ implemented a new case management system to support online services. A single inbox is used to keep track of all transactions, tasks and deadlines about a case, which can be viewed by clients as well as IPONZ staff.

She says the new technology has given clients a case manage-ment system that lets them manage their own IP portfolios.

Larger clients can use an online feature, where data entered on the client’s side can be submit-ted directly into the IPONZ system. The system has inte-grated services such as a RealMe login system and New Zealand Post address data, and links with the New Zealand Companies Register which all reduce data entry and errors.

Better for IPONZ, better for businessBy reducing many of the admin-istrative tasks and implement-ing a case management approach, IPONZ examiners have more rewarding work. They can focus on their core role of examin-ing applications to ensure high-quality and robust IP rights are granted. A transparent career progression framework has been

Left to right: Kath Atkins, Deputy Secretary, Growth and Public Services, The Treasury (presenting the award); Simon Pope, Team Leader Hearings, IPONZ, MBIE; Liz MacPherson, former Deputy Chief Executive for Strategy and Governance, MBIE (now Chief Executive of Statistics New Zealand); Ingrid Bayliss, National Manager, IPONZ, MBIE; Ross van der Schyff, General Manager Service Support and Design, MBIE; and Tao Morton, Team Leader External Relations and IP Awareness, IPONZ, MBIE.

Project Compass points IPONZ in the right direction


© About the awardThe Treasury Award for Excellence in Improving Public Value through Business Transformation recognises the significant fiscal challenges that the government faces and seeks to acknowledge some of the people who have responded to “smarter, better public services for less”. The best of these organisations or individual projects will have thought creatively about different ways of delivering services or carrying out their business. By challenging the accepted or ‘tried and tested’ methods they will have transformed some aspect of their business to deliver better services to New Zealanders at a significantly lower cost.

introduced so that examiners can develop their skills, have regular reviews, and move up the ranks. As a result, since 2012 there has been a 40 per cent increase in staff retention rates. In 2013, 68 per cent of staff stayed two years or more (up from less than 50 per cent in 2009).

Project Compass has also meant significantly reduced paper usage, storage and imaging costs. Bayliss says the efficiencies gained over the life of the new system will cover its capital cost, while allowing fees to remain the lowest of any of New Zealand’s major trading partners.

MBIE Deputy Chief Executive for Market Services Greg Patchell says, “IPONZ is now one of the leading agen-cies in providing government-to-business web services, which it provides to high-volume clients. By delivering all its services online, IPONZ and its custom-ers both benefit from the cost savings, also contributing to the government’s Better Public Services programme, which aims to make it easier to do business with government.”

Small and medium enterprise client costs for creating and storing files have also been reduced as many no longer need to keep their own case files and correspondence. Trade mark applications are more likely to be immediately accepted (up from 41 per cent in January 2009 to 67 per cent in January 2014) which means that clients can start using their right to brand their goods and services sooner. Client satisfaction with IPONZ is also steadily increasing (78.7 per cent in 2013, up from 74.9 per cent in 2012).

International trade opportunitiesThe introduction of a fully auto-mated system has opened inter-national trade opportunities for New Zealand. As part of the Madrid Protocol, signed in December 2012, New Zealanders can now file their trade mark and simply tick where in the world they also want protec-tion. This is helping to raise New Zealand’s profile for inter-national companies wishing to trade here and smoothing the way for New Zealand businesses

Key Features•Adesignthatfacilitatesupto3,700m2ofoffice,withnaturallighttoallfoursidesandplentifulcarparkingfortenants•Atargeted4to5-stargreenrating,withafocustoincorporateecologicallysoundsustainabilityfeaturesintofitout,constructionandoperationalaspectsofthebuilding•Neighbourswhohavebankedonbeingthere–literally!WestpacBankandASBbothhaveasubstantialpresenceaswellasthreemedicaltenancies.Close-byareWestfieldAlbanyandtheCorinthianRetailCentre–settobethelocality’scentralmeetingplace,providingconvenienceamenitiesincludingcafesandoutdoordining•Highlyvisiblefromthemotorwaydrivingnorthandveryaccessible•AsoughtafterlocationthatbenefitsfromgoodpublictransportinfrastructureavailabletoallpartsoftheNorthShoreandAucklandCity•Aprovengrowthareafordevelopmentacrossallsectorsofthepropertymarketandanaffordablelocation•Signagerightsavailableofferinghugeexposureforanybusiness.

New DNZ Property Fund Office Development – For Lease

FOR LEASE – Enquire todaywww.bayleys.co.nz/376415DevereuxHowe-SmithRealtyLtd,BayleysLicensedundertheREAAct2008

Tonia RobertsonM 021619200or094890964E [email protected]

39 Corinthian Drive, Albany

to export their branded goods and services.

Bayliss says IPONZ’s busi-ness transformation is lead-ing edge and she’s been sharing IPONZ’s journey with her IP counterparts in many countries that are part of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

“If we can help them also join the Madrid Protocol, it smooths the path for New Zealand exports into Southeast Asia.”

Looking to the futureIPONZ is now in the process of preparing to implement the Patents Act 2013. It also has a goal of providing better infor-

mation to New Zealanders so they know which IP to protect and what they can do with it. Clear graphical information on IPONZ’s website has resulted in approximately a 30 per cent reduction in questions to the contact centre regarding the different types of IP protection available, especially on what a trade mark is. Further improve-ments are planned in this area, for example, providing infor-mation on commercialising IP rights.

Bayliss says, “It’s all about providing seamless public services and reducing costs for business.”


Canterbury DHB and West Coast DHB Chief Executive David Meates talks to SHELLY FARR BISWELL about building a health system focused on keeping people well in their own homes and living independently for as long as possible.

David Meates is a man on a mission. While he’s been in the role of chief executive at Canterbury

District Health Board since 2009, he still talks and acts like a leader who is set to transform the way healthcare is delivered in the region. Of course, looking at the unique position Canterbury DHB has been in, particularly since the 2011 Christchurch earthquake, it’s clear that change has by necessity become the norm. It’s also clear that “improving” and “evolving” are paramount to his personal and professional philosophy.

When Meates stepped into his role, he came into a region where the healthcare system had been

very fragmented.“Primary and community

health organisations were extremely isolated, patients were being bounced around between providers and there wasn’t a focus that everyone could collectively make it better for our patients and community.”

In short, the system wasn’t working. If things didn’t change, Canterbury was looking at needing an additional hospital the same size as Christchurch Hospital, and would have required an additional 2000 aged-care beds and 20 per cent more general practices to serve its population.

“Even if we had the money to fund those increases, we would

not have sufficient staff and health professionals to run the additional facilities.”

While the system needed to be fixed, it was apparent that using the same old approaches was not going to resolve the underlying issues.

“We needed to connect our health system in a way that worked for providers and, more importantly, for Cantabrians. Healthcare can be very inward-looking, so the first thing we did was observe other sectors to see if there were things we could learn about building an integrated system. We immersed health professionals and managers into an environment where they were exposed to travel and tourism, customer-focused hotel management, elite sporting teams and Air New Zealand – anyone who might be able to

give us some fresh insights and to challenge our thinking.

“From there we asked, ‘How do we solve this problem?’. We engaged with about 2000 people across Canterbury’s health system who collectively helped create our vision.”

Picturing successDavid Meates says by working together and engaging commu-nities and health professionals in shaping what an integrated health system should look like, the vision became apparent quite quickly: An integrated health system that keeps people healthy and well in their own homes by provid-ing the right care and support, by the right person, at the right time, in the right place, with the right patient experience.

“It’s a vision that reduces pres-sures on the health system, but

From vision to reality – building an integrated health system in Canterbury

Centred on designThe Canterbury Health System is undergoing one of the largest infrastructure repair and rebuild programmes in New Zealand’s history as a result of the earthquakes. From primary care facilities, to ambulance facilities, to hospitals, to community services there’s an opportunity for Canterbury to transform the way its health system works.

To assist with this transformation, in November 2012 the Canterbury DHB opened a Design Lab in a large warehouse in Christchurch to feed into the rebuild of the system.

At the Design Lab, teams are given challenges to work on. For

example, in 2012, 16 clinical staff were given a design challenge to reinvent the layout of a hospital ward. Using insights from staff and patients, the team worked with design company NBBJ to explore ways to create a more functional and positive place. The team created the ‘Ōtautahi Concept’, which allowed for equal access to natural light for all patients and configures space so that there can be more visual contact between patients and staff. To date, more than 5000 people have been involved in the design process.

After extensive testing and refinement, the Ōtautahi Concept has become the conceptual ward design being used for both the Christchurch and Burwood hospital rebuilds.


more importantly it’s focused on keeping people healthy, produc-tive, and independent as much as possible.”

Meates says as soon as the vision could be articulated, it was important to create a visual repre-sentation of it.

“We needed people – from patients, to admissions staff, to specialists, to general practition-ers, to accountants – to under-stand where they fit within an integrated health system.

“Equally important was using language that was inclusive when explaining the vision. We talk about the Canterbury Health System not providers, we talk about ‘our health system’ and ‘how we can make it better’.”

He says they also worked to develop strategic criteria that guide everything they do within the system. The criteria include:• actively supporting people

to stay well within their own homes

• making primary health providers the first port of call for most health problems

• when people are in hospital making it a priority to enable them to return home as soon as possible – sometimes with a range of services provided in their home while they recover and regain independence.“We work within a complex

system, but we are working with extremely bright and capable people. Because people feel vested in the vision we have been able to achieve remarkable things. In many cases, our staff make even the imperfect work brilliantly because of their commitment and their engagement in creating the future.”

A focus on getting it rightMeates says the emphasis on changing the Canterbury Health System is based on the ques-tion: “How can I make it better

tomorrow?”He adds, “The

discussion isn’t centred on savings or doing more with less, it’s about finding the right solution and creating a system based on no harm, no wait and no wastage.”

That major shift in thinking means people who were at first sceptical have now become some of the Canterbury Health System’s biggest advocates.

Making it better has been the basis of a range of initia-tives, including Health Pathways. Today there are more than 670 Health Pathways in place and used in Canterbury that set out the agreed plan of care for people with certain conditions. Each pathway is agreed by a wide team of health professionals work-

ing across both the primary and hospital parts of the Canterbury Health System. Each Health Pathway is reviewed and updated to ensure best practice over time and guide how healthcare is provided in Canterbury.

To give a sense of how inte-grated the system has become, there are now processes in place that mean when one part of the system is under pressure adjust-ments can be made across the health system within a few hours.

“If the emergency department

is becoming full, then St John Ambulance diverts patients to the 24-hour medical centre in Canterbury and vice versa. The 24-hour facility provides a high level of service and has observation beds. This service has been integral to managing the flow of patients through Christchurch Hospital.”

It’s a collaborative approach that was recognised in 2013 by researchers from The King’s Fund, an independent charity in the United Kingdom, that called the Canterbury Health System one of the best-performing health systems in the world.

Testing the visionMeates says the work put in before the 22 February 2011 earthquake was the reason the health system in Canterbury did not collapse.

“Canterbury was already well into its journey of integration and building a health system based on relationships and trust and an absolute commitment from everyone working within it to make it better.”

By the numbers, Canterbury lost 105 acute hospital beds and 650-aged care beds due to the earthquakes. On top of that, 14,000 hospital rooms sustained damage and 700 staff were displaced from their workplaces. The fact that the health system continued operating through that time is remarkable and Meates says was only possible because of the highly engaged teams that work within Canterbury.

“Today more health services are being provided in Canterbury than before the earthquake, however, they are provided in a remarkably different way.

“Over the past 12 months we have provided care for 26,000 people in a community envi-ronment where elsewhere in New Zealand they would have ended up in hospital. If Canterbury was admitting medi-cally acutely ill patients at the same rate as other larger DHBs,

then in the last year we would have hospitalised 24,000 addi-tional patients.”

All of this change has occurred against a backdrop of the signif-icant impacts the earthquakes have had on Canterbury.

“We asked people to step up and they did. Much of our work since the Christchurch earth-quake has been ensuring our people can look after their own health too. That might mean

David Meates, Chief Executive, Canterbury and West Coast DHBs: “We engaged with about 2000 people across Canterbury’s healthcare system who helped create our vision.”

An integrated health system that keeps people healthy and well in their own homes by providing the right care and support, by the right person, at the right time, in the right place, with the right patient experience.

>


Below is a visual representation of the vision for Canterbury’s health system. “We needed people – from patients, to admissions staff, to hospital custodians, to specialists, to general practitioners, to accountants – to understand where they fit within the system,” David Meates says.

working flexible hours for periods of time and bringing new support services into the workplace. A positive work environment is absolutely crucial to attaining our vision.”

Outside the boxMeates says it’s important to think beyond the typical confines of healthcare providers when considering a health system.

“Just as we needed to integrate the hospital with primary care, we have also needed to look at ways we can work with schools, busi-nesses, community organisations, researchers, and government agencies to improve the system.

“One of our priority areas of work is reducing alcohol-related harm. Alcohol-related incidents

have a huge impact on health-care. For example, about half of patients treated for facial fractures at Christchurch Hospital have been involved in incidents related to excess alcohol. In addition, hospital staff are verbally and even physically abused by intoxi-cated patients on a regular basis.

“If we are really going to make a difference to the impacts of alcohol we need to be actively engaged in our communities. What are the causes of alcohol abuse and how can we reduce those?”

Canterbury DHB has an Alcohol Harm Coordinator who works across the system and community to help shift Canterbury’s alcohol culture.

Charting the emotional journeyOne of the Canterbury Health System’s recent initiatives has given a whole new meaning to “people-centred”.

Meates says to give the best patient care possible for people who need to be in the hospi-tal, it is important to understand the emotional journey of those patients and their family and friends.

“The Emotional Journey initi-ative involved interviewing and filming more than 130 patients and their families through their journey from the Emergency Department to two weeks post discharge – in their home – through general surgery, general medicine, orthopaedics and cardi-

ology while they were in hospi-tal. We know that a patient’s emotional response has a direct correlation to getting well and quality of life, so it’s been impor-tant for us to understand what we can do to create a positive environment.”

He says some patients were willing to be filmed so that staff could see exactly how certain interactions or situations affected them.

“It was eye opening for many and certainly has led to a more empathetic approach in every-thing we do – from admissions, to prepping for surgery, to visit-ing hours, to billing, to rethinking how our new health facilities will be shaped.”


In recent issues of Public Sector we have been exploring different aspects of what the move towards Better Public Services means in terms of leadership, recruitment and cross-agency collabo-ration. In this issue, CARL BILLINGTON takes a closer look at some of the im-plications for how we approach training and development with the BPS results in mind.

Dr Alexandra Vranyac-Wheeler, Head of Agencies and Regulatory for The Skills Organisation, says training needs to be more than just sending

staff on a course. “It’s so much broader than that and the

focus today is much more about developing capability across the sector as a whole,” she explains.

As the industry training organisation funded and mandated by government to arrange training for the New Zealand public sector, Vranyac-Wheeler says The Skills Organisation encourages an approach where people practically apply what they have learned in their workplace.

“For managers, we encourage them to consider what opportunities they are creating for people to test and experiment with what they are learning. It’s a much broader and long-term approach.”

Raewyn Pointon, Leadership Development Practice Manager for the Leadership Development Centre, says, “Professional development needs to be based on how we are supporting and enabling our organisations, our leaders, and our people to develop.”

As LDC Chief Executive Rosemary

Hannah-Parr says, “We need to ask: How is our development approach supporting people to perform in their current role and building depth within the public sector for the future?”

Changing expectationsVranyac-Wheeler says that changing expectations are shaping what The Skills Organisation offers.

“In the old days, industry training organi-sations focused on people achieving qualifi-cations as a proxy for skill development. This focus has needed to change so that employees and employers now think about how they can develop, practice and support the application of competencies in the workplace, and what that means for their organisation, the wider public service, and ultimately how it contrib-utes to the government’s Business Growth Agenda.”

She says The Skills Organisation covers 20 different industries and engages with 126 public sector organisations.

“The public sector needs our organisation to be less about qualifications and more about developing competency and capability which can lead to a qualification outcome. The ques-tion for us is how we can use what we offer to support the internal capability develop-ment across the public sector? If we can work with an agency in partnership to help bench-mark competence and develop a competency framework that underpins a career pathway for its workforce – that’s a start.”

She says it’s also important to understand why people have chosen to work in the public sector in the first place.

“Often people join the public service because they want to contribute to society

and make a difference. Successful employ-ers will understand that and understand their employee value proposition.

“The New Zealand Defence Force is a great example of an organisation that has worked hard to understand why people come to work with them and is now using their career development as their employee brand.”

New Zealand’s biggest career shopRaewyn Pointon says, “The public service is the biggest career shop in New Zealand. It covers everything from social services and customer contact, through to law and policy-making. People generally come to the public service as it fits with their sense of self and their desire to contribute. If we can’t engage that they will go somewhere else.”

Rosemary Hannah-Parr adds, “The Leadership Development Centre thinks it’s the right of every employee to have the opportunity to work with the best leaders they possibly can during their career in the public service, regardless of where they sit in the organisation or what level they work at.”

So if it’s about more than just manag-ing and ‘training’ our poor performers, what do we focus on? How do managers really support their people and organisations to develop the capability that’s required both now and for the future?

“At the leadership level, we have become much clearer about what the development journey needs to look like if it is to produce the quality of cross-sector leadership we need,” Pointon explains.

A new approachThe team at the Leadership Development Centre has encapsulated these characteristics

Learning for high performance

>

© 4

7743

44se

an |

Dre

amst

ime.

com


in a simple acronym, which they refer to as the DAVI experience – the essence of which is strongly reflected in a number of speeches by State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie as well.

“D stands for diversity,” Hannah-Parr explains. “We need people who have diverse experiences interacting with diverse people at diverse levels in diverse roles. It’s about building the capacity to ‘walk in the shoes’ of multiple people and perspectives.

“A is for adversity. At the senior level we will be looking for people who have adver-sity experience in the kete. They have gone through some really deep-end experiences and not only come out the other side, but also reflected on it and have grown and developed as a result,” she says.

“V is for variety,” says Pointon. “It’s about working in different sectors, different organi-sations, and different roles. Don’t just go up the stovepipe, climbing the ladder in a single field or a single organisation. How much life have you seen? You need to be able to show you are open to new experiences and becom-ing more nimble in how you operate and what you focus on.

“Finally, I is for intensity. Have you had experience leading through times of crisis and extreme pressure? Do you know what it is like having to make big decisions with big ramifications but little information?”

For Pointon, the DAVI framework is as much about developing character as it is about building skills. She acknowledges if

this is the type of leadership we aim to culti-vate within the public sector, we need to support that development path.

“The literature suggests that, on average, 70 per cent of our learning is done through doing – we see this in the way children learn about action and consequences through direct experience. The full picture is that 70 per cent of what we learn to apply is learnt on the job, 20 per cent through coaching and mentoring from peers and managers, and 10 per cent from formal learning,” Pointon says.

“The literature also suggests that we lose up to 85 per cent of what we learn if we don’t apply it within three months. Unless the 70/20/10 concept is beautifully integrated, we are not going to gain any lasting benefit from any of our development activities,” she says.

“When we ask senior leaders about the most significant developmental experiences in their career, they almost always focus on a time in their earlier career when a manager gave them a deep-end experience and really trusted them to succeed with it,” adds Hannah-Parr.

“Usually, the manager was available when they needed them, but not too available. These are the experiences that really produce growth. We hear this over and over. People need to be supported in their development and then given the chance to test themselves. Otherwise, how will they build confidence in their ability to face anything?”

Pointon concludes, “So it’s as much about the opportunities we put around people

within the organisation, either side of any development, and how much room we give them to really test what they are learning.”

Building supportJeff Osborne, Assistant National Secretary for the New Zealand Public Service Association, says developing capability is about partnership.

“To be transformational, agencies need to consider not only how they train, but also how they engage their staff. Transformation must involve the actual workers, it can’t just be management or top-down change.”

For Osborne, the mechanics of this are quite simple.

“Managers need to talk with their staff and teams. My suggestion is don’t make decisions on content or delivery or process until you have sat down and really talked with those involved early, often, and genu-inely. Don’t turn up with a ‘marvellous’ plan. Instead, turn up for a conversation and ask Where do we want to go together? What training and development do we need to get there?”

He acknowledges the challenges of the current financial environment, but maintains we must put more effort into supporting our staff with the transition required by the BPS results.

“How do departments take those cross-sector concepts and apply them to ordinary workers? Secondments are a great example of a professional development approach already being used,” he says.

“But even that requires a shift in think-ing; not being fearful that a secondment will mean you lose someone, but instead recog-nising that if that happens it’s a good thing. That person is building a career in the public service which is for the wider good. It’s about cultivating this type of thinking.”

From Osborne’s perspective, more still needs to be done to support the development of staff in light of the challenges of the BPS results, but there are some encouraging signs.

“The work the State Services Commissioner is doing in the leadership field is encouraging because it’s exposing potential new public service leaders to other organi-sations and other ways of doing things,” he says.

“It’s targeted, breaking people out of their silos and focusing on their learning needs

Alexandra Vranyac-Wheeler, Head of Agencies and Regulatory, The Skills Organisation:“People practically apply what they have learned in their workplace.”

Raewyn Pointon, Leadership Development Practice Manager, Leadership Development Centre: “The public service is the biggest career shop in New Zealand.”

Rosemary Hannah-Parr, Chief Executive, Leadership Development Centre: “It’s the right of every employee to have the opportunity to work with the best leaders they possibly can...”

Jeff Osborne, Assistant National Secretary, Public Service Association: “This is why people join the public sector in the first place – they want to make a difference.”


Machinery of Government-> Thu 29 May, 9am–4pm

Big What? Managing and Understanding Big Data and Business Intelligence-> Mon 16 & Tue 17 June, 9am–4.30pm

Using Social Media for Effective Public Engagement-> Thu 19 & Fri 20 June, 9am–4.30pm

MAKE NEW CONNECTIONS

Short Courses

MARCH TO DECEMBER 2014

Victoria Professional and Executive Development

Value Management Master Class: Enterprise Governance of IT for Executives and Senior Managers-> Wed 7 & Thu 8 May, 9am-4.30pm

Aspire: Women’s Leadership Development Programme-> Starts Tuesday 13 May

Advanced Policy Leadership Workshop-> Thu 22 & Fri 23 May, 9am–4.30pm

Victoria Professional and Executive DevelopmentHigh quality professional and executive development courses to enhance the capability of your organisation. A selection of the courses coming up in May and June:

We also deliver in-house courses, and can customise existing courses or design new programmes to suit your requirements.

For course dates, further information and to enrol visit www.victoria.ac.nz/profdev or call us on 04 463 6556.

Our latest 2014 short course catalogue is out now. View it online at www.victoria.ac.nz/profdev

In a nutshell...The State Services Commission’s approach to leadership and capabil-ity development includes: • a system-wide approach to gradu-

ate recruitment and development • a system-wide approach to iden-

tifying and developing emerging leaders

• building on the current senior lead-ers development programme

• a succession planning system for all senior leadership roles and key positions

• an increased focus on building the capability of the state services, increasing functional skills and areas of expertise that are funda-mental to delivering results.

which nicely reinforces the idea that public servants are not just employees, they have chosen to be here to make a difference and we want to encourage and support that.”

He adds that the state services need to have common terms and conditions, along with collective agreements on career development.

“That way people can move around and grow professionally not only within their organisation, but across the public service as a whole.”

For Osborne, the promising aspect about the BPS drive is that it’s focused on the public service as a whole and how the public service can meet the needs of the citizens of New Zealand.

“The underlying principles emerging are definitely ones the PSA would agree with. This is why people join the public sector in the first place – they want to make a differ-ence. Our challenge is to acknowledge that and move away from a managerial culture to a more open, participative and respect-ful culture. I think if agencies approach their staff development from that point of view we will see some transformational change really embedding itself.”

Breaking new groundPicking up these challenges and support-ing the public service to address these issues is exactly what the Leadership Development

Centre is tasked with. Hannah-Parr says, “Most of our leaders

haven’t experienced this sort of approach or seen it modelled themselves. We are asking them to work together to create something genuinely new here.

“It’s not enough to just want to be a chief executive today. It’s about how you lead. Unless you can engage people emotionally you won’t succeed.”

Supporting changeState Services Commissioner Iain Rennie says, “People are at the heart of what we do. To deliver better public services for New Zealanders now and in the future, we need to develop and take care of our most important resource – our people.

“We want the right people with the right skills in the right roles. Delivering outstand-ing results in today’s challenging environ-ment requires a very different approach to training and leadership development. That is why in partnership with public service chief executives and their agencies and the Leadership Development Centre, we are introducing a system-focused approach to leadership development and deployment. We will work together to identify and address critical skills gaps in the system.”

He says a better coordinated, system-wide approach to developing leadership and capa-bility will ensure the sector has a supply of

capable, high-performing state servants who can step up to senior leadership roles and other key positions that are critical to the successful performance of our system.

“Our goal is to have a state services leader-ship pipeline that provides enhanced devel-opment opportunities for high performers at different levels, from graduates through to chief executives.”


Dealing with criminal justice in New Zealand has traditionally been a cross-agency challenge, spread across the Police, Justice and Corrections departments. Not any-more. Joined-up Justice, a programme of integration across the criminal justice ‘pipeline’ to achieve continued crime reduction, has raised the bar for interagency collaboration. Writer KATHY OMBLER learns how the programme created a number of firsts for the public sector and why it earned the 2013 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Award for Working Together for Better Public Services.

Andrew Bridgman, Ministry of Justice Chief Executive and lead CE for the justice sector, says the programme came out of a recogni-

tion at a senior level – from the Government and agencies – that if the justice sector really wanted to make a difference for New Zealanders “we had to approach things differently, and formally work together as much as possible”.

Through the Joined-up Justice approach, key justice agencies came together and estab-lished a four-pronged strategy that includes: • a unified sector governance structure• a major initiative to drive front-line

innovation• changes to funding that enables the pool-

ing of resources from across the crimi-nal justice pipeline and the reallocation of resources to where they are most needed

• identification and resolution of any obsta-cles to the joined-up sector approach at the front-line.Joining up the sector has included the

creation of a Justice Sector Leadership Board for governance, a public sector first. Comprising the chief executives of the New Zealand Police, Ministry of

Justice and Corrections Department, and periodically including partners Crown Law, the Serious Fraud Office and Ministry of Social Development for youth justice, the board has provided an integrated sense of strategic direction. Achievements include the development of a sector-wide Better Public Services action plan, which includes 60 initiatives to reduce crime and offending.

Justice Sector FundCritical to the sector’s success has been the establishment of the Justice Sector Fund, another public sector first, which enables funding saved in individual justice sector agencies to be used across the justice pipeline for higher-value priorities. Normally, such savings are reinvested back into individual agencies or returned to central government. The fund also gives the sector more flexibility to transfer funding between years.

Each agency has contributed money to the JSF and has collaborated to determine

where that money should be reallocated. In deciding initiatives to be supported by the JSF, priorities have been those that contrib-ute to government result areas, such as BPS targets, and enable the sector to modernise and become more cost effective.

Since the inception of JSF in 2012, there have been three funding rounds and almost $84 million has been reprioritised. Initiatives to have received the go-ahead include the expansion of Audio Visual Links (which uses audio-visual conferencing technology to allow people, for example remand prisoners, to participate remotely in court proceedings), an expansion of restorative justice services to make it available in every court, and the Out of Gate innovative reintegration programme for prisoners.

“The JSF success to date is testament to the sector working across individual agencies’ vertical accountabilities for wider cross-sector outcomes,” says Bridgman.

Left to right: Sandi Beatie, Deputy Commissioner, State Services Commission (presenting awards); Viv Rickard, Deputy Commissioner, New Zealand Police; Andrew Bridgman, Chief Executive, Ministry of Justice; and Ray Smith, Chief Executive, Corrections Department New Zealand.

Connecting the dots – Joined-up Justice

© K

bunt

u |

Dre

amst

ime.

com


Locals know best A stand-out Joined-up Justice achieve-ment has been the Hutt Valley Justice Sector Innovation Project. Based on the premise that front-line managers and staff understand their local situation and have the expertise to develop local solutions, the project was initi-ated in 2012 by the Justice Sector Leadership Board, as a pilot to deliver BPS at the front-line. During the project’s establishment, the board became actively and personally engaged with the project team.

“The project has succeeded in its aims to enable justice sector agencies to work more closely together, through the introduction of shared targets, and to work with the commu-nity and other agencies to deliver better justice and social services in innovative ways,” says Bridgman.

Several inventive services, along with more collaborative ways of preventing and responding to crime have resulted. These include a community mobile office which takes justice and social services into the community; Audio Visual Links between court and prison to increase safety and improve services; an iwi panel that hears low-level offending, particularly for Māori offend-ers, and supports those trying to reform and not reoffend; and Operation Relentless, where justice sector staff focus intensely on a particular crime-driver issue for a period of time. For example, in 2013 there were three Operation Relentless targets: alcohol, at-risk youth, and family violence.

“Our combined effect is more powerful than our own solo agency efforts,” says Hutt Valley Area Commander, Mike Hill, who chaired the project team. “This is what the public is expecting of us in 2014 and beyond,” he adds. Hutt Valley justice sector manag-ers and staff now collaborate on a daily basis,

their aim is to solve problems and work faster. The Hutt Valley is on track to pass all

of the Government’s reducing crime and reoffending BPS targets. In fact, in the region all of the reducing crime targets have already been exceeded. Since June 2011 total crime is down 23 per cent, violent crime is down 21 per cent, youth crime is down 36 per cent and reoffending (for the wider Wellington region) is down 10 per cent.

The Leadership Board sees the Hutt Valley Project as a model for front-line inno-vation, says Andrew Bridgman. “In addi-tion to rolling it out to three more areas, it is being nominated for an IPANZ award and other front-line areas are being encouraged to adopt a similar approach.”

Evaluation and transparencyFrom the start, the Justice Sector Leadership Board has been committed to openness and accountability, and Joined-up Justice has been underpinned by a monitoring and evaluation framework based on a well-defined govern-ance structure.

A quarterly performance report is prepared by the sector group with material provided from all justice sector agencies. This report focuses on both BPS measures and a range of agreed performance indicators. Regular reports on progress towards BPS results are also published online, quarterly meetings are held with justice sector non-governmental organisations, and justice sector forecasts are published on the Ministry of Justice website.

Sector chief executives meet every month to review and plan initiatives. They are supported by a cross-sector group located within the Ministry of Justice, which facili-tates and leads the project work.

Where to from here?The Justice Sector Leadership Board will

continue to focus on delivering on the justice sector BPS results, says Bridgman. “Current trends indicate that we are likely to achieve the headline target, a 15 per cent reduction in crime, this year, which is three years early.”

To sustain this progress, significant work is underway to tackle long-standing issues which have historically been intractable, in particular in the area of family violence, and improving the sector’s responsiveness to victims. To ensure this effort translates into tangible actions, a refreshed BPS results action plan will be developed this year, says Bridgman.

Also, 2014 will see some major steps towards improving the openness and trans-parency of the sector. The first Justice Sector Annual Report was published last month and the ‘Justice Datalab’ was launched to make justice sector research and information easily available to the public. The Justice Datalab is available at http://datalab.justice.govt.nz.

About the awardThe State Services Commission recognises that coordination across state agencies will deliver better results. That’s because the total contribution of government agencies working together is greater than the sum of its parts. The SSC sponsored the Excellence in Working Together for Better Services Award to identify and commend government agencies that are taking a joined-up approach. We congratulate the justice sector for its work through Joined-up Justice. By working together, the justice sector is delivering on Better Public Service results and creating a safer New Zealand.

Prisoners learn trades to gain jobsMore than 680 prisoners from the three Department of

Corrections Central Region’s prisons have achieved trade qualifications which will help them get jobs on release. Prisoners who work on release reoffend less.

In 2013, more than 4000 prisoners nationally achieved Trade Certificates (Level 1 to 4) in a variety of areas, including plumbing, painting, agriculture, timber processing, light engineering, catering, horticulture and joinery.

Corrections is committed to reducing reoffending by 25 per

cent by 2017. Research shows there is a strong link between employment and reduced reoffending.

“It is important that prisoners are gaining employment skills that meet the labour market needs of the area they plan to reside in when released. Providing trade training to offenders is the perfect way to give a prisoner the tools to support themselves and their families and to contribute positively to their community,” says Kim Smith, Principal Advisor Employment Development, Department of Corrections.


Over the past 150-plus years, New Zealand’s census taking has become more detailed and reliance on census data to assist with evidence-based decisions about public policy has grown in importance. Writer BRIAR EDMONDS learns how look-ing at where we are as a country allows us to better plan for the future.

Today, as well as government agencies, a variety of organisations rely on New Zealand’s census data to make decisions, including councils, community organisations, businesses, and researchers. Liz MacPherson, Government Statistician at Statistics

New Zealand, says census data are widely used in public policy-making. “One example of this is the Electoral Commission’s use of the

census to calculate the Māori and general electoral populations. These population counts are used by the Electoral Commission to set electoral boundaries.”

The Ministry of Health uses the data to more accurately target over $44 billion of government funding via MoH’s Population-Based Funding Formula. The formula, in use since 2003, is based on population projections and the New Zealand Deprivation Index, which is derived from census data.

She says census data are also a factor in deciding how much funding schools receive. “The Ministry of Education establishes schools’ decile ratings using the census data, which helps determine the level of government funding a school will receive.”

And it’s probably no surprise that the Ministry of Social Development relies on census data for much of its work, including the design of social programmes ($18 billion per annum), as well as strategic planning, social reporting, and outcomes monitoring and reporting to the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development.

Data for the peopleStatistics New Zealand provides the census data to government agencies and to the public in a variety of ways.

“We spend a lot of effort and time communicating with customers and promoting our products to ensure the widest possible use of

CCCCounting to the future

census data. When planning the census, we engage with the public and key users of census data from relevant agencies on their information needs,” says MacPherson.

“When census information is available, we publish a range of different products to target different customer groups, including the public sector. These range from our public-focused QuickStats products, through to the products that satisfy technical users, such as NZStat which allows you to build your own tables about subjects and geographies. A customised data request service is also available to those customers with more complex needs.”

She says Statistics New Zealand places special emphasis on having strong relationships with key users. “We also offer a range of presentations and seminars throughout the country for customers interested in learning more about the census data.”

Statistics New Zealand’s core role is to produce the statistics so that public policy-makers can use the data in evidence-based decision-making.

“We often collaborate with central and local government to produce relevant and timely information. An example recently is the joint initiative between Statistics New Zealand, the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, and some of the Canterbury councils to produce ‘QuickStats about greater Christchurch’. This culminated in a well-received event in Christchurch with over 100 local council, government, business, and community leaders. This data will be critical to the rebuild in the region,” says MacPherson.

“We also work closely with outside social commentators and academics who help us to interpret the data and are in a better position to use the data to monitor and critique public policy.”

Interpreting dataDr Paul Spoonley, Distinguished Professor at Massey University, is what he calls a ‘broker’ of census data and translates the data to feed into the public policy-making process. Spoonley praises how Statistics New Zealand managed the 2013 Census.

“The way the census material


was put together for 2013 is a huge improvement on previous years,” says Spoonley. “It’s been pitched at a level that meets both the public interest, and the needs of policy development and research. The other good thing about this year is the information is getting into the policy process much earlier than in the past. Statistics New Zealand has been fantastic at sharing the information this time around – we are getting data dumps much earlier and more regularly.”

Spoonley does have two key caveats to the 2013 Census data. “Canterbury is an ongoing issue,” says Spoonley. “Because of the earthquakes, it was much more difficult to contact people in the Canterbury region so I do have concerns about whether we have the whole picture in that part of New Zealand. Statistics New Zealand has put additional resource into mitigating this issue, which is good. But Christchurch certainly remains a concern.”

New migrant communities, particularly non-English speakers, are another group Spoonley thinks could be

under-represented within the 2013 Census data. “Because of their varied backgrounds and experiences with government in their previous countries of residence, members of these communities can be suspicious of government agencies collecting data on them and therefore can be less likely to complete the census. This means we don’t always get the information we need on these communities. More work needs to be done to educate these new migrant communities about the reasons for the collection of the data and what it is for.”

Data in the Digital AgeLiz MacPherson says Statistics New Zealand is constantly looking for ways to improve its collection and release of census data.

“The 2013 Census was a year for trying new things. In Oamaru, Statistics New Zealand

piloted online forms as the default option and saw a massive increase in web-based forms coming in. This bodes well for progressively moving census collection online, which will save time, resources, and tax-payer dollars.”

She adds that for the 2013 Census, Statistics New Zealand created a products and services release schedule to give the public and policy-makers clarity on when and what type of products would be released. “In determining the order of release, we have worked to balance the needs of our users with the time required to develop the product.”

The release schedule is over an 18-month period that began 15 October 2013 and will end in June 2015. This quarter (April

through June 2014), a number of key products will become avail-able, including the 2013 Census standard dataset, QuickStats about culture and identity, and district health board tables.

“We have tried to schedule the release of products so that we cover a wide range of topics as we go, rather than having all the information on a certain topic released at once.”

MacPherson says Statistics New Zealand will continue to look for ways to improve. “In the next census, we will be making more use of administrative data to improve the quality of information produced for customers while reducing costs. The next census will also be an ‘internet-first’. It will make it as easy as possible for people to securely complete their census form online.”

She adds, “The census provides us with a very rich source of data, but is this the only way we can get access to this data? Are there other mechanisms we could use that could reduce costs, respondent time, and maintain or improve the information we need to grow and prosper? These are questions that our teams are working on right now.”

Statistics New Zealand’s core role is to produce the statistics so that public policy-makers can use the data in evidence-based decision-making.

A changing societyThe key findings of the 2013 Census show a New Zealand that is much less homogenous than it was in previous censuses. Government Statistician Liz MacPherson explains, “New Zealand is increasingly becoming more culturally diverse with one in eight people being from an Asian ethnic group. The proportion of people of Asian ethnicity has been increasing in New Zealand for a number of years and reflects migration trends, for example, between 2001 and 2006 the Asian ethnic group numbers increased by nearly half.”

Cultural diversity is also apparent in the growing numbers of the population who were born overseas, which is now at just over 25 per cent, compared with 22.9 per cent in 2006. Languages spoken here are also becoming

much more varied, with Hindi now the fourth most common language after English, Māori, and Samoan. One in five people of Māori descent speak te reo Māori – a 5 per cent decrease since 2006. On the flip side, however, younger people of all ethnicities are more likely to speak te reo Māori.

The 2013 Census also confirms that New Zealand’s population continues to be an ageing one. The population has grown by 5 per cent since the last census and is now at 4,242,048. Yet while the overall population has increased, there are less people under the age of 15 and the number of people in the 50 to 69 year age bracket has increased significantly. This is further reflected in the rise in the median age from 36 in 2006, to 38 years in 2013.

Dr Paul Spoonley, Distinguished Professor, Massey University: “The way the census material was put together for 2013 is a huge improvement on previous years.”

Liz MacPherson, Government Statistician, Statistics NZ: “We spend a lot of effort and time communicating with customers and promoting our products to ensure the widest possible use of census data.”


The introduction of the State Sector Act 1988 fundamentally changed New Zealand’s system of public

management. In recent years many have questioned whether it was time for a review of the Act. As part of this rethink, in February, the New Zealand Public Service Association and the New Zealand Fabian Society published Rethinking the State Sector Act based on a 2013 seminar series of the same name. The publication includes essays from some of New Zealand’s most knowledgeable thinkers on the State Sector Act 1988 who shared their insights about the Act and whether it’s relevant for today’s public sector.

A stocktake of today’s public sectorIn his presentation, Sir Geoffrey Palmer offered his perspective on where the public sector is today. Below is an excerpt from his essay.

“I think the public service has declined in quality. I remember telling Helen Clark when she became prime minis-ter, if the reforms of the Fourth Labour

Government were done now I do not believe that the public service would have the capacity to carry them out. There are many reasons for this decline and I want to go through what I think they are.

1. A cult of management: We have the idea that people who are competent manag-ers can manage anything whether they know anything about the subject or not. I don’t think that’s true. I believe you need to have some competence before you can make good decisions. Using this approach has also meant there has been a dramatic loss of institutional memory in many departments.

2. Migration to the private sector: Another issue is the fact that the public service has suffered from people migrating to the private sector. The levels of rewards for top public servants are insufficient and that has an effect on the quality of the staff. The public service needs the best

and the brightest and has to be able to recruit and retain those people.

3. Policy design is much more difficult: The challenges that the public service face are much more intense, and the level of skills and knowledge that are required to deal with those challenges are much greater than they used to be.

4. The silo effect: There is a lack of coor-dination between departments. While Cabinet is the prime instrument of coor-dination and many of the problems lie in the hands of ministers, the fact remains it is much more difficult than it used to be to get cooperation between officials.

5. Ineffective legislation: The manner in which legislation is made and the way in which it is passed has profoundly changed as a result of MMP.

6. The Crown’s legal risk is not adequately protected: Unlike Australia where the Crown’s legal resources are centralised through the Attorney General’s depart-ment, in New Zealand our legal resources are splintered and too thinly spread.

7. Serious structural issues exist: The number and size of departments needs some rational attention. Agencies should not be designed for the convenience of the government of the day; they should be designed for the effective administra-tion of what those agencies do.

8. A lack of training: There doesn’t seem to be as much training in the public service as there used to be which I suspect has to do with the fact there isn’t enough power at the centre.

9. A weak centre: The SSC [State Services Commission] is a pale shadow of what it once was. While I am not advocating a return to the bureaucratic edifice that both Stan [Rodger] and I have described, it does seem there needs to be greater capacity to get the public service march-ing in the same direction and also to address quality issues which seem to be rather seriously lacking, the Pike River Mine disaster, the leaky homes crisis, and the issues with Novopay being just a few examples. I don’t think the answer to any of this lies in the recent legislation [the 2013 legislative amendments to the State Sector Act, Public Finance Act, and Crown Entities Act], which is so infected with principles of management speak that it is very difficult to understand.

10. Free and frank advice to ministers: Free and frank advice is the hallmark of the Westminster system and is currently in short supply in the New Zealand public service, partly because ministers don’t want it. This problem is not new, but it is wrong. Ministers should be exposed to the views of public servants whether they like them or not.”The 2013 Amendments

In his essay, contributor Associate Professor Bill Ryan discusses the significance of the Better Public Services Advisory Group Report, noting: “The report was exhortative but incomplete, limited by its pragmatism, but it hinted at some of the international changes that are beginning to shape public manage-ment. Moreover, and particularly important, is that the report demanded a step change in the public sector. In that sense, the report represented a window of opportunity.”

He continues: “The legislative reforms that passed in 2013 could have grabbed that opportunity, but disappointingly they did

Time for a rethink?


new professionals

BENEFITS OF ATTENDING

Practical professional development

Opportunity to discover new ideas

Explore how to navigate change

Build your contacts across the public sector

IF THERE IS ONE EVENT YOU ATTEND THIS YEAR, MAKE SURE THIS IS IT!

www.ipanz.org.nz/npconference

not. There are some important changes in the legislation: extending the powers of the State Services Commissioner and multi-category appropriations, as two examples, but the legislation is not the step change that is required. In fact, in some respects the implicit recentralisation through the reforms, for example, seems to go in the opposite direction from where it should. In general, the legislation reflects changes that are just mechanical readjustments instead of incorporating the thinking that has been growing since the mid-1990s about govern-ance in the 21st century…

“If we really do want something visionary, strategic, something more enabling and less prescriptive we need to start again.”

Next stepsSeveral of those who contributed to Rethinking the State Sector Act have called for a Royal Commission of inquiry into the state sector. As Dr Matthew Palmer noted in his essay, “We need a thorough and inde-pendent assessment of what the objectives of our public service should be, what the options are for delivering on those objec-tives, and independent analysis of the best means of achieving them.”

He goes on to say that following the find-ings of a Royal Commission, the govern-

ment of the day, opposition parties, and leaders of the public service will need to understand and embrace the Royal Commission’s recommendations and adds, “These recommendations will then need to be institutionalised not only in legislation, but also in organisational culture.”

As PSA national secretary Brenda Pilott said in the publication’s closing essay From words to actions, “Whether a Royal Commission is the right way to proceed, the PSA will be further developing its think-ing on the public sector and the State Sector Act and will be ready to discuss these with an incoming government that is ready to make the changes that are required to strengthen and support a high-performing public sector.”

Publication overviewFollowing a foreword by Mike Smith of the New Zealand Fabian Society, the first essays are by two of the architects of the Act, Hon Stan Rodger and Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey Palmer, who discuss the creation of the Act, the reasons behind it, and how it has served the public sector over time. Essays three and four are reflections by Dr Mike Reid of Local Government New Zealand and Trevor McGlinchey of the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services on how

the Act impacts on the way central govern-ment works with local government and the community sector.

In essays five and six, Professor Margaret Wilson of the School of Law at the University of Waikato and Associate Professor Bill Ryan of the School of Government at Victoria University of Wellington examine building public services for the 21st century.

Essays seven and eight are insights from Labour MP Hon Nanaia Mahuta and Associate Professor Mānuka Hēnare on the place of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi in state sector legislation.

The final two essays are by Massey University Vice-Chancellor Hon Steve Maharey and Dr Matthew Palmer who is a Barrister with Thorndon Chambers. They each look at the current landscape of the public sector.

The publication is rounded out by an essay by PSA National Secretary Brenda Pilott on how the seminar series has helped to shape the PSA’s thinking on this topic.The publication is available as an ebook at

www.psa.org.nz and www.fabians.org.nz. Edited by Shelly Farr Biswell. Audio presen-tations for each seminar are also available at www.psa.org.nz.

http://www.psa.org.nz

http://www.fabians.org.nz

http://www.psa.org.nz


POINT OF VIEW

Culture of integrityBy Phil O’Reilly

Integrity and transparency are important to the New Zealand economy. We are a nation that depends on overseas trade and investment, so our reputation and

brand in overseas markets matters greatly. For some years, New Zealand has

been known as the “world’s least corrupt nation”. The latest survey by Transparency International shows New Zealand and Denmark in first place equal for freedom from corruption. This is the result of good business conducted by New Zealanders over decades and generations, and it is an outstanding competitive advantage.

A trading economy free from corruption is in a good position to build trust with trading partners. A country without widespread corruption can be far more efficient, effective and prosperous than a corrupt one. Freedom from corruption means people and property can be protected from criminal harm. It also means contracts can be enforced, allowing confidence in commercial transactions, an important precondition for business and economic growth.

Freedom from corruption comes not just from a country’s police and justice system, although these are essential, but from an ethos among its people. A culture of integrity is what makes the difference.

Having strong integrity systems and a culture of integrity means democracy can work properly. It means the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box can be implemented, and politicians who do not carry it out can be replaced.

A culture of integrity allows for a well-functioning bureaucracy – bureaucrats who cannot be bribed are a major

protection against corruption. This will be apparent to anyone travelling in countries where graft and corruption are widespread, bureaucracies do not work effectively, and policing and justice systems cannot be relied on.

Lacking strong integrity systems brings lack of hope. Where there is an absence of justice and order, a lack of ability to enforce contracts, and a lack of ability for political change to occur, there can be little hope of improvement.

New Zealand’s situation is very different. We can hope for a better future because our systems and our culture give us the power to put right things that are wrong, and to achieve continuous improvement. It would be easy to take this remarkable achievement for granted. We have scored highly in the ‘least corrupt’ rankings for a long time, but that does not guarantee this will continue. In fact, it is becoming harder to maintain.

We trade with a wider range of countries now. Until a generation ago our main trade relationship was almost exclusively with the United Kingdom, whose justice system and bureaucracy is similar to ours. Now we have trading relationships with just about every other nation on earth and we trade significantly with those with very different cultural and justice systems from our own.

We are also becoming less homogenous as a society. Ongoing immigration over the last half century has made us one of the most culturally and ethnically mixed nations on earth. So there is not the unanimity of values that existed in the past.

Maintaining our culture of integrity in the

midst of these changes is a key task. There are many ways to do this. First by jealously guarding our bureaucracy, celebrating its probity, and ensuring strong integrity systems throughout the public service. Secondly, by ensuring the best possible governance in all organisations, both public and private.

Governance systems for public compa-nies are well codified in legislation, enshrining principles of fairness, account-ability, transparency and independence, and requiring directors to act in good faith, maintain transparency and independence and avoid conflict of interest.

Companies that are not listed on the stock exchange – the majority of New Zealand firms – and other civil organisations are not required to comply with such regulation, but their need for good governance is just as pressing. For these organisations, an important step is to set up formal governance and management structures to ensure decision-making is according to explicit values.

Our involvement with Transparency International will continue to benefit New Zealand. Transparency International monitors and publicises cases of corruption all over the world, and acts as a check against crime and malfeasance. Perhaps our best check against corruption is to ensure continued awareness among New Zealanders of the value we obtain from our reputation and from integrity itself. Phil O’Reilly is Chief Executive of BusinessNZ, New Zealand’s largest business advocacy group.

General Election 2014 The State Services Commission has developed a set of questions and answers to complement their comprehensive guide for the 2014 election period.

The guidance includes information on advertising and communications, political rights of state servants, and

Official Information Act releases during the election period.

The SSC has also developed a 10-minute video that discusses some of the main information in the election guidance.

www.ssc.govt.nz

© M

ark

Robe

rts

| m

ychi

llybi

n