Restructuring for the sake of it, without a clear sense of what you’re trying to achieve and where you’re going can be expensive, it can destroy morale, and it can totally de-rail progress on the things that matter. There seems to be quite a bit of that happening in the public sector at the moment.
Take the recent establishment of the new Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MoBIE). Many of the component parts of the new ministry had already been the subject of restructuring under National.
The Ministry for Science and Innovation was barely a year old when it was disestablished to become part of MoBIE. As David Shearer revealled today, that short-lived Ministry managed to clock up over half a million dollars in ‘branding’ and promotional costs, all for an entity that no longer even exists.
I think David Shearer has summed things up pretty well:
“MSI now stands for Ministry of Silly Integrations. For over two years science and innovation officials have been in one merger or another. The plain fact is that mergers stall policy development and that’s why there hasn’t been an innovation policy to speak of from this government.”
I totally support the drive for better public services, but let’s not waste money restructuring every time there is a new Minister who wants to mould their own little empire.
Well said. But worse – are some of the restructures and mergers really mainly designed to just emasculate existing departments. It always results in more, and expensive consulant reports, which we all surely know can often be little more than produced by chosen toadies to give voice to a ministers latest scheme. It stands to reason that a consultant who does not ‘comply’ is easier to leave in the cold than a public servant. The control is much easier!
It can be well argued that the forced serious downsizing and then marriage of the Ministry of Forestry with a somewhat disinterested dominant Agriculture monster saw a massive decline in the forest industries (other stuff certainly did contribute)- But the forest industry was starved in its time of need.
I would venture to suggest that the Leaky /rotten homes crisis would have been prevented by a healthy independant Forestry Department with a research arm not beholden to self serving industry interests. A vibrant independant Forestry ministry could never have let its Pinus radiata ‘beloved child’ have its image so tragicly tarnished by the absurd removal of timber treatment in a major product. In fact I understand some efforts were made to prevent the ‘gross stupidity’ but ignorance, industry pressure, and a hamstrung research arm(Public/ private research) ensured no action and consequently massive public and private loss.
The increased efficiency argument is weak compared to the loss of independant advice and institutional knowlege
It is easy to see why restructures and amalgamations are so beloved by ministers hell bent on control to further their partisan interests, rather than for the greater good of the whole nation.
Government should keep to the KISS Principle Keep It Simple Stupid
The leaky homes situation was authored by BRANZ who claimed that framing did not need to be treated.
Look at who BRANZ is – certainly not a govt research body run by scientists.
The private sector who instigated the degrading of standards are not the ones paying for the mess.
Where is the “reform” on that.