PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Archive for the ‘public services’ Category

Shared Services- Across the ditch

Posted by Grant Robertson on July 19th, 2011

There is a lot of work going on inside the public service in New Zealand around the idea of shared services. On the surface this looks like a good idea. There are sure to be efficiencies to be found in bringing together systems and some purchasing practices. But we need to go into this with our eyes open. For instance some of the government’s pruchasing contracts are shutting out smaller New Zealand companies.

And now a second Australian state has run into trouble with trying to merge payroll, HR and finance systems. This time it is Western Australia where the government has been forced to pull the plug on the new state wide payroll and finance system. It was meant to cost $82 million to set up and save $50 million a year, instead it has cost $440 million since 2003, and “saved” $42 million over the whole eight years. Premier Colin Barnett has called it “one of the great bungles of public administration.” In Queensland there was another massive cost blowout when their new payroll system collapsed.

DIA is leading the work for some massive shared services projects here. The Health sector is alive with them. Treasury, SSC and DPMC are about to launch into a shared services arrangement. Other big arrangements are in the wind. There might well be good value in some of these but there should be a good dose of caution as well.

Filed under: public services
4 Comments

There’s money in being green

Posted by David Shearer on July 8th, 2011

I was at the very cool and slick launch of Pure Advantage last night. There’s been a bit of media around it, but the message is simple – NZ is clean and green and it’s not only a great thing but we can leverage it to make money out of it. Check out their facebook and website.

A line from last night:
China has committed a trillion dollars to alternative energy. And it’s not because they care about trees.

There’s money to be made in being green.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Green Jobs, Pure Advantage, Research & Development, economy
6 Comments

the leader of the national party sends even more kiwi jobs to China

Posted by Trevor Mallard on June 24th, 2011

Very interesting that the leader of the national party and Steven Joyce have left it to a Chinese website to announce that they have on our behalf purchased another 20 locomotives that should have been built at Hillside and Woburn. No tender. And the first 20 over a year late from the same Chinese source.

Maybe it was because Kiwirail were at the same time firing staff in Dunedin and the Hutt Valley.

Because it is Kiwirail not Chinarail it is time the economic benefits of these purchases (jobs created, skills developed, tax paid, benefits avoided) rather than just the accounting costs are taken into account.

KIWIRAIL Purchase Additional 20 sets of “MADE IN CHINA CNR” Diesel-electric Locomotives
Source?Author?Date?2011-06-17
On June 2, CNR Import & Export Corp. Ltd of CHINA CNR Corp. Ltd. Singed another contract for 20 diesel-electric locomotives with KIWIRAIL New Zealand. The partner PPD company in New Zealand of CNR Import & Export Corp. Ltd has been strongly supporting this contract. This is KIWIRAIL to the CNR purchase after first 20 locomotives in 2009.

Tags:
Filed under: Rail, Unemployment, economy, inequality, infrastructure, public services, redundancy
22 Comments

Nats plan more radical ACC reforms?

Posted by Chris Hipkins on June 5th, 2011

Nick Smith’s argument in favour of privatising the ACC Work account has already been blown out of the water by the private insurance industry themselves, who openly admit that they can’t offer cover as cheaply as ACC can. This from the Dom Post story:

Vero’s executive general manager of new ventures Nigel Edmiston said his company – which is owned by the Australian SunCorp Group – had done some planning on entering the workplace insurance market but that the Government’s proposal “wasn’t particularly attractive”…

Edmiston said that private insurers would not be able to compete with ACC’s pricing and would prefer it was excised completely from the market.

“[ACC] have a huge market share, they have all the infrastructure and systems, they’ve got no set up costs, they don’t pay tax and they don’t pay dividends and they don’t need capital.”

He said at the outset private insurers would need to provide 80 cents in capital expenses for every dollar gained in premiums on such a product.

In other words, Edmiston is confirming what we’ve said all along. ACC is incredibly efficient and cheap, and it ensures that all of the money collected actually goes into helping those with injuries, rather than into the profit lines of the Aussie insurance industry.

The only way the private insurance industry could compete would be if ACC was excluded, in other words, the cheapest provider was arbitarily shut out of the market. How exactly would that be competition?

This all begs the question, however, of just how enduring Nick Smith’s commitment to his current proposal is. If National win the next election, don’t be surprised to see a more radical proposal for ACC reform suddenly emerge as National claims it has won a ‘mandate’ to do whatever it likes in dismantling our world-leading ACC scheme.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: ACC, privatisation, public services
18 Comments

Time to re-think govt office space

Posted by Chris Hipkins on June 4th, 2011

I see yet another brand new high rise building is being planned for the lower end of Lambton Quay, with a government department, reportedly the Ministry for Social Development, signed-on as the anchor tenant. Frankly I’m getting a bit fed up of seeing massive amounts of money spent on brand new buildings in the Wellington CBD for government departments and agencies. Why does every government employee need to be located right opposite the Beehive in some of the most expensive real estate going? Why is it important for a call centre operator to be located across the road from the Minister they are never likely to meet?

Out here in Upper Hutt, we’ve got plenty of office space going that would be ideal for government employees, and it would cost the taxpayer about a third of what it costs to keep them in CBD offices. In this era of greater austerity and cost-cutting, surely we should be looking at whether or not we need to continue to prop up a bunch of central city property developers when there is plenty of office space on the periphery and in the suburbs that’s already available (not to mention the economic, social and environmental benefits of allowing people to work closer to where they actually live).

Public servants are entitled to work in comfortable surroundings, but that doesn’t mean they have to be accommodated in brand new CBD offices. It’s time for a major re-think about how government procurement of office space is handled. Having different government agencies bidding against each other for new office space is just stupid, and I understand that has happened in the past. Perhaps it’s time for a more centrally coordinated approach, with an increased emphasis on de-centralisation?

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: public services, wellington
27 Comments

Penguin campaign cover

Posted by Trevor Mallard on May 28th, 2011

farrar-campaign-cover

Filed under: humour, national, public services
32 Comments

Are the Nats dodging the OIA?

Posted by Chris Hipkins on May 22nd, 2011

The Official Information Act is a really important part of our constitutional framework. Passed back in 1981, it turned the old approach on its head. Before then, information was kept secret unless there was good reason to release it. Now State information is publicly released unless there is good reason to withhold it.

Government departments and agencies have pretty good processes for dealing with requests for official information. An important part of that is making sure information generated is captured and stored in the first place.

The world has changed a lot since the Official Information Act (OIA) was passed in 1981, one of the most notable changes being the emergence of email as a significiant means of information sharing and communication. The public service has adapted and information transmitted via email is captured and released under the OIA when requested.

Recently I was told that some staff working in National ministers’ offices have been setting up Gmail accounts in order to get around the OIA and to ensure that their communications aren’t captured. If they are transmitting ‘official’ information through Gmail and aren’t releasing it when asked, they are breaking the law.

I asked John Key whether he had a policy on the use by staff of Gmail. He is the Minister Responsible for Ministerial Services, so if staff working in the Beehive are breaking the law then the buck stops with him. He answered my question stating “The question the member asks relates to staffing matters which are the responsibility of the Chief Executive.”

Frankly, that’s just not good enough. John Key has a responsibility to ensure that the staff working in the Beehive are complying with the law and aren’t hiding official information. If they are using Gmail accounts to get around the OIA, John Key needs to crack down on that ASAP. Failure to do so suggests they have something to hide.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: democracy, parliament, public services
17 Comments

Making Sh*t Up

Posted by Grant Robertson on May 18th, 2011

I know sometimes people find it hard to understand why some of us, especially Labour MPs, get so upset with that “nice Mr Key”. Of course we disagree on policy, but in part I think it is because we see a side of him in Parliament others don’t. Also for me its about his tendency, to use the phrase of the moment, to “make sh*t up”.

An article in yesterday’s Dominion Post on the likelihood of further public service cuts included the following statement from John Key.

They have typically been having higher levels of wage increases prior to National coming into office; public sector wages outstripped private sector wages for a long period of time.

The problem is this is just not backed up by any evidence. Actually the Treasury told them the opposite just after the election. Ruth Dyson as Labour’s State Services Spokesperson released that document yesterday, which Labour had obtained under the OIA. It says

Public sector wage increases have not outstripped the private sector with the exception of the education and health sectors, which arguably address legacy problems and respond to international markets

The reference to education and health is to pay increases for doctors, nurses and teachers that occured under Labour. The PM in the article is talking about the core public service. In actual fact under the last Labour government the pay for “core government administration” was almost exactly in line with private sector wage increases. The PM has just made something up to suit his agenda. He needs to be called out on this, and its good the Dom Post have done so.

The NZ Herald also has an article that covers the PMs (deliberate?) vagueness, with the news that he is not sure if he is a member of Kiwisaver.

Prime Minister John Key yesterday could not remember if he was a member of KiwiSaver. “I’m a member of whatever that Government scheme is that applied to members [of parliament] that came in in 2002. “I think it might be [KiwiSaver] but I’m not 100 per cent sure.”

The register shows that Mr Key has an “individual retirement plan”.

I am sure there are a few Kiwis who would love to be in a position when you are not really sure if you are in Kiwisaver!

All over the details, that’s our PM.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: kiwisaver, public services
16 Comments

Policy Advice Review-Perpetuating the Myths

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 29th, 2011

Forgive me for this I told you so moment, but it infuriates me. To recap. Last year the government announced a review of policy advice. This was the one where Bill English claimed an alternative was to look on websites for policy, the “government by google” approach.

The announcement of the review came complete with the usual hyping up of Labour’s record on public services.

Between 2003 and 2009, total Government spending on policy advice across all ministries, departments and agencies is estimated to have jumped by more than 70 per cent from about $510 million to $880 million. “This is faster than the already rapid general increase in total Government spending during this period,” Finance Minister Bill English says. “The amount spent on policy advice is now nearly three quarters of the Government’s total annual police budget and it almost matches our annual spending on social housing.

At the time I raised concerns about the “estimate” of spending on policy advice being based, according to the Terms of Reference for the review, on

appropriation data from Budget data files gained by searching on the terms ‘policy’ and ‘policies’ in the title field

Terrific attention to detail there. And now that the report has been produced the Dominion Post reports

At the time the review was announced, the Government claimed policy spending had risen from $510 million in 2003 to $880m in 2009. However, the review – led by former Treasury secretary Graham Scott – found that most of the increase was spent on non-policy-related activities. Excluding the Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry, overall spending actually declined slightly in real terms over the period.

That’s right, with one exception, spending on policy advice went down in real terms. National has spent a lot of time going on about how Labour increased the back office at the expense of so-called frontline services. But their own report, by the former ACT candidate Graham Scott, finds this is not true.

Will we hear a retraction or apology from Bill English? No, he glosses over it as an estimate, despite making such a big deal of it at the time.

I welcome finding ways of improving policy advice to government, but it is not ok just to make things up that suit the myths you want to spread.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: public services
5 Comments

On Murray McCully, leopards and spots

Posted by Maryan Street on April 28th, 2011

And now for something NOT about the Royal Wedding….has anybody noticed how remarkably consistent Murray McCully is? I mean, recall the Tourism Board fiasco when McCully was last a Minister? First, he created a little advisory unit to advise him alone on Tourism and Sport. He made it up. He appointed all the members – no precedent in the public service. Then he forced people he had appointed to the Tourism Board to resign, but made sure they took $340,000 tax free with them to make them feel better. The Auditor-General’s Office later found the payments to be unlawful and recommended the Board get the money back. Good luck with that – that was 1999. He also got a one-off $12.5 million boost for the Tourism Board for promotional work so that his mate Kevin Roberts, head of Saatchi and Saatchi at the time could live comfortably, given the Tourism Board was one of S&S’s clients. That got Jenny Shipley into a lot of hot water but she couldn’t remember what she and Kevin had talked about over dinner so that was alright.

Now he’s at it again, but this time with a Ministry (MFAT) which is a little harder to push around, but he’s still succeeding. Last year he passed over $75,000 or so to his old mate, Mark Blumsky, ex-shoe seller, Mayor of Wellington and fleeting MP. No tender process, no bidding required – just “here’s some money Mark, go and see what you can do to develop tourism in Niue. Oh, and by the way, I’ll chuck in the High Commissioner’s job as well.” He’s building on that success to reach over the top of trained and qualified diplomats to open postings to the private sector, who as we all know, are supremely qualified to run everything (eg: Merrill Lynch, Hanover, South Canterbury Finance, etc.).  So how can we continue to train diplomats who have NZ’s interests at heart when they know that McCully is simply going to reach over them with his sticky little fingers and dish out goodies to mates? Much has been made recently by Iain Rennie, State Services Commissioner, of how good it is for public sector workers to be seconded into the private sector. Well, it might be. But it would be really good for private sector whizz kids to spend some time in the public sector also – learning the difference between public interest and private interest; service and corruption. I am proud of our public service. They help us maintain our international reputation for being transparent and virtually corruption-free. I don’t know if Murray McCully understands that. Leopards and spots….that’s all I’m saying.

Tags:
Filed under: Foreign Affairs, admin, public services
14 Comments

Tell the Government: Don’t Cut Our Future!

Posted by Trevor Mallard on April 27th, 2011

Flyer

t Cut Our Future

Tags:
Filed under: ACC, Arts and Culture, Budget, Child Support, Civil Defence, Consumer Affairs, Cost of Living, Green Jobs, Health and Safety, Skills, TVNZ 7, Victims' rights, Working for Families, act party, asset sales, broadcasting, business, children, conservation, debt, disabilities, economy, education, environment, family, finance, food, health, housing, inequality, jobs, justice, law and order, low pay, minimum wage, politics, public services, science, senior citizens, social development, superannuation, youth
21 Comments

The state of our services

Posted by Grant Robertson on April 25th, 2011

A curious little article has appeared today quoting State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie. Curious for a couple of reasons. First, the whole thing sounds like a political statement rather than that from a public servant. I certainly accept that public services will change the way they deliver services over the next few years, and we all welcome efficiencies in the public service. But his certainty about “the next five years” (why five years?) is also curious. The part of the statement about a reduction in the number of agencies is the direction of the current government, but it looks at public services the wrong way round from my point of view. We should be looking at the kind of services we want and need, and then considering how they are best delivered, not having a fixed view about the number of agencies going into that.

The article notes that SSC itself is safe “at this stage”. There are many wondering if it does have a future, with the future shape of the public sector being driven elsewhere. The overall strategic direction is coming from Treasury. The IT services are now with the Department of Internal Affairs, and procurement initiatives are being driven by MED. SSC is limited to the employment of Chief Executives as its main function.

I actually think this is a bad thing for public services. Treasury’s role is important in terms of fiscal discipline, but the agenda of quality public services needs someone to balance the power of Treasury. We have seen in past decades that an over powerful Treasury can wreck havoc if there is not some balance in the system. In its current state SSC does not look much like that organisation, but some competition of ideas in terms of the future development of public services is vital to their future health.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: public services
19 Comments

More twaddle from Tony

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 30th, 2011

Today saw the latest release of Tony Ryall’s statistics on the number of people employed in the public sector. Let’s recap on how these figures come about;

  • National says they will cap, but not cut the public service. (see John Key’s speech to PSA Congress 2008)
  • In order to “measure” this National creates something called “core government administration” and says that resources will go from there to the “frontline”.
  • Tony Ryall admits in Parliament that he has no definition of what “frontline” services are, and later that there are jobs in “core government administration” that might be considered frontline, and may have been cut. (think DOC rangers, Fisheries and Biosecurity officers)
  • After two years more than 1800 positions are gone, with the promise of more, and morale in the public service and public confidence in services sink further.

National Party supporters crow that this is just what is needed to reduce wasteful bureaucracy, and celebrate thousands of New Zealanders losing their jobs. Remember this is a government that supposedly has a “relentless” focus on jobs and keeping people in work. And as Bill English has told us this is just the beginning. These jobs don’t exist in a vacuum, they are linked to services we all need and use.

There is no doubt the Christchurch Earthquake showed the value of those who are “at the frontline” like the rescue workers crawling through rubble, and those who back them up, like the staff at the Ministry of Health who coordinated the moves of disabled Christchurch people and set up the emergency response network with DHBs. They are both important, and we need strong public services for all New Zealanders.

As with Tony Ryall in health this is all just slogans and manufactured targets. There is nothing here about the quality of public services New Zealanders are receiving, how they will be more responsive, innovative and linked to their communities. Just scratching a political itch. To make matters worse, he claims credit for more teachers and doctors, which a) may not actually exist and b) if they do began their training under Labour.

Lets have more efficient public services, by all means, but New Zealanders deserve better than Tony’s twaddle.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: jobs, public services
12 Comments

What we all should be talking about

Posted by Clare Curran on March 27th, 2011

In the middle of the night our time, somewhere between a quarter and a half a million people marched through London to express their frustration and fear about the impact of huge cuts in the public service.

Most are unglamorous, obscure, unfeted projects, staffed by employees who are not very well paid, but hugely committed to what they do. All of these losses come as a result of the government’s decision to cut spending by £95bn over five years.

Our government has been steadily making cuts since they took office. Most are unglamourous, unfeted projects. Most of the people affected are the already disaffected.

There’s been a steady campaign by the government to build a picture of a public service which is bloated and inefficient.

And to build a picture of the recipients of public services especially beneficiaries, as being rip off merchants. People who didn’t deserve the help anyway. Or should be standing on their own two feet by themselves.

Now we face the prospect of a zero budget. Just think how many more jobs will go, how many more services will be cut, how many more older people will be colder and left to cope on their own. How many more small children in families with low or no incomes will go without a meal, a new pair of shoes, access to a computer at home, while their parents can’t afford the school uniform, the school trips, the essential trips to the doctor, let alone a holiday.

There are no new jobs on the horizon. There are no new industries. There are no really good ideas that people can latch onto and think “this is our future” “I get what this is about”.

There is no hope.

Meanwhile our front pages are full of finger pointing and rotten egg throwing at the latest scapegoat in a political scandal.

My country matters. My electorate matters. I’ve got people who need jobs, who need to know they have a future. I want to give them hope.

Tags: ,
Filed under: children, public services
47 Comments

Meanwhile, in Wisconsin…..

Posted by Darien Fenton on March 12th, 2011

I know it’s a long way from New Zealand and our sorrow about Christchurch – and now Japan.

But dramatic events have been taking place in Wisconsin, USA – so radical to democracy, we need to take notice.

After weeks of the Democrats avoiding a vote in the Wisconsin State Assembly, Governor Scott Walker and the Republican dominated Senate have used a legislative manouvre to pass a bill that will strip public sector workers of their fundamental international and human rights.  The bill is based on the scapegoating of public servants we are seeing around the world.   Somehow public sector workers are to blame for the economic meltdown and burgeoning deficits and they must be punished.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has  insisted that stripping the rights of public sector workers is essential to resolve the state’s budget deficit—and rammed through anti-union measures that take away the rights to collective bargaining for public sector workers.

It all happened so quickly and undemocratically  : a special conference committee that hadn’t existed just a few hours earlier called into session, and a brief statement from the Republican chairman that basically boiled down to “We’re allowed to do what we’re about to do.”

Apparently, it was over in seconds.

No discussion. No debate.

Other US States are endeavouring to follow Scott Walker’s approach.

Wisconsinites are stunned and outraged. Thousands have descended upon the Capitol. There will now be big efforts to recall all of the Republicans who voted in favour of this outrageous breach of fundamental rights.

While Libya and the Middle East are also in the news and causing real concern, we need to be aware that in the so-called” free world”, serious attacks on democratic decision making and the fundamental right of workers to join together and bargain with their employer are occurring.

It’s a trend that is extremely worrying.  It’s a deliberate attack on public sector unions, who, in countries like the USA, UK, Australia and New Zealand have much higher levels of union membership and collective bargaining than the private sector.

We’ve seen a milder (but no less offensive) version of the rhetoric here – “bloated public services,” “backroom office staff,” “bureaucrats” etc.  We better take heed of the lessons of the US and what buying into this kind of blame this can lead to.

Tags: ,
Filed under: international, politics, public services, workers rights
22 Comments

Competition and public service

Posted by Clare Curran on March 10th, 2011

Ok. So the headline isn’t very sexy.

But why has the government bailed out Mediaworks with a $43 million low interest deferred payment for its radio spectrum licence while it appears set on axing funding for TVNZ7,  the new and vibrant young digital public channel?

I’m not having a go at Mediaworks here. They’re an important part of our media. But surely TVNZ 7; an innovation which doesn’t cost much and is tackling how to deliver dynamic Kiwi content in a low cost but accessible format is something to be nurtured. It’s ours. It’s a public service. It’s a treasure. But apparently one that’s not valued by this government.

The cuts to TVNZ 7 funding haven’t been announced yet. But it’s clear they will be and we’ll lose some of the best shows to grace our screens in recent years; Media7, Backbenchers to name a couple.

TVNZ, our supposed public broadcaster, has been clearly told to stop doing the public bit and focus solely on delivering a profit back to the government. Which it’s doing. Sort of. Though much of what it delivers us isn’t produced by Kiwis about Kiwis.

Radio NZ struggles to keep its head above water.

And we have a very big player, Sky, which has captured 50% of NZ households and is doing very nicely thank you. Which you can’t fault because they’ve had pretty much a free run for years.

What’s wrong with our broadcasting (media) industry?

It’s not rocket science to conclude that if we don’t have a competitive private sector then we don’t have healthy industry. We don’t get innovation, investment, new markets opening up, old ones dying off.

And if we don’t have a strong public service, we don’t have a healthy society. It’s why we pay our taxes. It’s the glue that binds us.

A competitive private sector and a strong public service are not mutually exclusive.

A strong modern public media is critical to a functioning democracy.

I’m in London at the moment. The BBC, Channel 4, ITV are all hugely important. Critical analysis, breaking news, quality (and some rubbish) local content. It’s all part of the mix. The Brits are pretty well served by their media.

There are some double standards at work here. And blinkers on. You can’t give a break to one part of the industry and leave another in the cold. And you need some rules. That’s why government can’t be hands off.

The problems don’t just span the last two years. Let’s be honest. But it’s time we sorted it out. Because we’ll be a poorer country without a healthy media.

Tags:
Filed under: broadcasting, comms & IT, digital, media, public services
24 Comments

In praise of the public servants

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 6th, 2011

No one would be surprised to see a  blog with this title from me, but the messages are coming through loud and clear that the work of public servants over the last twelve days in support of Christchurch has been magnificent.

There is the obvious, in the form of the police, fire, ambulance and rescue workers whose incredible efforts have been on show, day and night.  The road and utility workers who as one said the other night have done three months work in three days.

But also, those considered as the backroom staff.  As John Armstrong noted yesterday

Suddenly, it has become patently clear why those Wellington-based public servants are so essential. The lights have burned late into the night in departmental head offices across the city. The Herculean, but largely invisible efforts by head office officials have underpinned what has, so far, largely been an effective and well co-ordinated response to getting Christchurch back on its feet.

From the Civil Defence staff who have planned, coordinated and managed the response to a disaster on a scale far beyond anything in the lifetime of most New Zealanders, to the Work and Income and Health staff who have processed tens of thousands of applications, moved people and resources around the country and supported all those on the ground.

Of course not everything about the response to the disaster is perfect, and it is totally legitimate for questions to be raised about where resources are going and to make sure those who are vulnerable receive the support they need.But the hard work is not in question.

So-called back office public servants can be a political target as Anthony Hubbard noted in the Sunday Star Times today

National, it’s fair to say, has mixed feelings about bureaucrats. It came to power promising to cut the number of officials who weren’t in “the front line”. But the earthquake has shown how vital the officials are, and not just the people who aim the hoses or crawl through the rubble. Intelligence and competence are needed in the back room as well as the front line. All are needed to make the machine work.

So, let’s congratulate and thank our great public service for all their work, both out in the public glare and behind the scenes. Well done, team.

Filed under: Canterbury Earthquake, public services
6 Comments

Obfuscation on the BMWs

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 16th, 2011

In the comments on Trevor’s post there are a few things being discussed re the purchase of a new fleet of BMWs that need to be cleared up.

First that National was “locked into” upgrading the fleet after three years. The PM said this yesterday and various cheerleaders have carried it on today. It is simply not true. Listen to the interview on Checkpoint (starts at 17.50) where a DIA spokesperson confirms that the contract had an option to renew and there was no financial penalty for not doing so.

Second, the spin about this being an “Internal Affairs” matter. That is an important choice of words from Nats to distance John Key from what is becoming a major issue for them. The part of Internal Affairs that deals with the VIP cars is Ministerial Services. The Minister responsible for Ministerial Services is John Key. This is his patch.

I agree with Trevor that it is an absurd notion that no-one in the Beehive knew that this was going on. When I worked in the PMs office we had very regular contact with Ministerial Services on all manner of things, and a major purchase like this would have been one of those things. I know that the level of coordination in the Prime Minister’s office these days is pretty sloppy, so I guess its possible they are simply not thinking about these kinds of issues, but still find it incredible if it did slip through.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: national, public services, transport
16 Comments

Public Sector bashing an (inter)national sport

Posted by Darien Fenton on February 9th, 2011

Bill English delivered a message today that public servants who can’t handle change and are waiting around for more money should look for a new job. In other words, cop what the government delivers, be grateful, or b*gger off.

Scapegoating the public sector workforce isn’t confined to New Zealand.  Public sector bashing is a favourite occupation of right-wing governments around the world, particularly since the global recession.  And because public sector workers tend to be more highly unionised than the private sector, their unions are also a target.

In the US, New Republican governors, old right wing radio commentators, Fox News and other extremists are stoking the rhetoric, with a simple narrative, repeated endlessly, that public service and public sector workers are the reason for State and Federal budget problems. This is a blatant effort to disguise the real culprits in the global meltdown and an effort by the mega-rich to preserve their privileged position. 

In the UK, public sector workers are in the gun, not only for huge cuts, but also for blame for the recession, while bankers are getting off the hook. George Osborne, the Tory Chancellor, called unions a “force for stagnation” as they prepared to oppose public service cuts to libraries, community workers, childcare staff and health service staff. Osborne is now threatening changes to the rights of workers. UK business organisation the Institute of Directors (IoD) has called for collective bargaining to be scrapped for teachers and NHS staff. 

Millionaires and right wing economists don’t like the public sector. They want more privatisation so as to create more profitable business opportunities. They want sackings and wage cuts which will allow big earners to maintain low tax rates.  It’s the old neo-liberal prescription which, unfortunately we are seeing emerging in New Zealand.

I want to know if people actually believe that nurses and teachers are responsible for this economic mess?

Wasn’t it the greed of the private sector that got us into the global economic meltdown? Wasn’t it caused by unsustainable lending and complex forms of debt by banks?  Aren’t they and the greedy corporations are to blame, not a few thousand workers employed in the public sector?

But now the rich elite and their friends in conservative governments are trying to pass the buck onto workers by attacking their job security.

Bill English continues to talk about the “bloated public services”, as if there are no human beings involved there.  I’ve got no problem with efficiency and productivity gains and nor, I am sure, do our public sector workforce.

But let’s remember that public sector spending goes well beyond the directly employed public service workforce.  In the UK for example, public spending supports 40% of all jobs, with just 15% in public sector employment and 25% in the private sector.  And public spending and public services (including public service utilities) support 50% of the UK economy – twice as many in the private sector as in the private sector. 

So for those who have may have brought into the rhetoric of public sector blame; get real.  Your job probably depends on public sector spending as well, and Bill’s coming for you too.

Tags:
Filed under: Global financial crisis, economy, public services, workforce
36 Comments

Broken Promise No.15

Posted by Grant Robertson on February 8th, 2011

So the big idea to kick-start the New Zealand economy in John Key’s Opening Statement to Parliament today was to have a bash at public servants and propose the re-organisation of the public sector. Tired old stuff, and we won’t dwell on how this will actually create jobs, but more than that the second part of the “plan” is a huge break of the promise John Key made before the 2008 election. This is what he said to the PSA Congress in 2008

I also want to reassure people – and this is my second point – that a new National Government is not going to radically reorganise the structure of the public sector.Our focus is squarely on delivering services, not on changing the wiring diagram of the state sector to get a tidier conceptual model.

Few problems are solved by significant reorganisations – in fact, many more tend to be created. It is easy to underestimate the amount of energy and inspiration soaked up by institutional change, as well as the loss of personal and institutional knowledge.

Just as Labour has done, we will take opportunities to make changes to some agencies as part of the usual business of government. However, there will be no wholesale reorganisation or restructuring across the public sector.

Read his lips- no wholesale reorganisation or restructuring. I guess that sits along side the promise to cap but not cut the public service in the same speech, or not to increase GST or……

Tags: , ,
Filed under: public services
14 Comments

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »