Public Sector dec 2014 by Della Urgenc

Rāngai Tūmatanui

Vo l u m e 37: 4 D e c e m b e r 2 01 4 Journal of the Institute of Public Administration New Zealand

PUBLISHER The Institute of Public Administration New Zealand PO Box 5032, Wellington, New Zealand Phone: +64 4 463 6940, Fax: +64 4 463 6939 Email: admin@ipanz.org.nz Website: www.ipanz.org.nz ISSN 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. EDITOR Shelly Farr Biswell: shelly@biswell.net CONTRIBUTORS Carl Billington John Larkindale Margaret McLachlan Rose Northcott John O’Leary Lawrence Yule PROOFREADER Nikki Crutchley JOURNAL ADVISORY GROUP Len Cook Chris Eichbaum, Chair John Larkindale Julian Light Margaret McLachlan Ross Tanner ADVERTISING Phone: +64 4 463 6940; Fax: +64 4 463 6939 Email: comms@ipanz.org.nz

CONTENTS President’s message by John Larkindale................................................................ 2 IPANZ news: Exploring How Auckland Works.......................................................... 3 Top public management student recognised......................................................... 3 Cover story: Interchange – where central and local government meet.......... 4–9 On the road: NZTA and local communities.............................................................. 7 Innovation at the nexus............................................................................................ 9 NZ Police – the search for excellence............................................................10–13 Better Public Services and digital transformation.........................................14–16 The Whitehall Effect................................................................................................16 In brief: Productivity Commission – inquiry into using land for housing............17 Audit committees in the public sector...................................................................17 Where politics and the public service meet – a conversation with Michael Webster.........................................................18–19 Future gazing and the public sector...............................................................20–21 Environmental justice in Canterbury.............................................................. 22–23 Point of view: Intergovernmental collaboration: Why central and local government need to work together for New Zealand to prosper By Lawrence Yule, President, Local Government New Zealand..........................24

NZ Police – the search for excellence Pages 10–13

DESIGN J&K Design PRINTING Lithoprint SCOPE IPANZ 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 AUTHORS Public Sector considers contributions for each issue. Please contact the journal’s editor for more information.

Environmental justice in Canterbury Pages 22–23

SUBSCRIPTIONS IPANZ welcomes both corporate and individual membership and journal subscriptions. Please email admin@ipanz.org.nz, phone +64 4 463 6940 or visit www.ipanz.org.nz to register online. DISCLAIMER Opinions 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 factual content. The publishers and editorial staff, however, cannot accept responsibility for any inadvertent errors or omissions that may occur.

Front cover image: © Angkawijaya92 | Dreamstime.com – Highway No. 1 On Auckland 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).

December 2014 Public Sector 1

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

The role of the opposition is always to oppose…right?

By IPANZ President John Larkindale

ollowing its lack of success in this year’s general election, the Labour Party is undertaking a thorough review of its approach to the campaign and has just elected a new leader. It seems timely, therefore, to reflect on the role of the opposition in a Westminsterstyle democracy such as ours in New Zealand. There is probably little argument with the proposition that an essential role for the opposition is to hold the Government accountable for its actions through the parliamentary process. Another role is to set out policy alternatives and to make the case for why these are better than those of the Government. But does this mean that the default setting for the opposition should always be one of being against what the Government proposes? I suggest not. Looking around the world, we see an increasing number of countries in which the political process is becoming more and more polarised. The most obvious case is the United States, where, as I have noted previously, the Democrat and Republican parties have moved so far apart that there is virtually nothing on which they agree. The result is congressional deadlock. In the United Kingdom, too, there is significant polarisation, albeit of a different kind, namely the increasing split between those

who would take the UK out of the EU and those who disagree. In addition, there is a major divide between those parts of the country that consistently vote for the Conservatives and those that vote for Labour. Elsewhere in Europe too, we are seeing increasing support for political parties espousing more sharply defined policy platforms. There is always a debate that can be had as to whether the emergence of these new, often less tolerant, political forces reflect societal views or whether they are a catalyst for changing those views. The reality is that probably both factors are important. The key outcome, however, is that there is a diminution of an electorate-wide support consent environment for the government of the day. I believe that in New Zealand today there still remains broad agreement on the central principles that should underpin our society. New Zealand is a market economy in which individual enterprise is encouraged to flourish, but also one in which we all, through public sector engagement, wish to ensure that the disadvantaged and vulnerable are given sufficient support and assistance to allow them to participate actively in everyday life. By and large, despite the gap growing between advantaged and disadvantaged over the past quarter century or

so, most New Zealanders are still motivated to support the concept of a fair society as a fundamental guiding principle. This broad consensus is important, in that it leads to the main grounds for political debate being means and not ends. This should result in a far less divisive political playing field than if there were no such agreement. But as we have seen to some degree during the election campaign just past, this is not always the case. I would put out the proposition that the people of New Zealand would be better served if our political leaders would be prepared to acknowledge the principle that there are a significant number of areas on which there is wide agreement on fundamental policy elements. This is already tacitly acknowledged as is shown by the fact that both major parties recognise the need to gain support from the political centre if they are to be part of the next government. A practical consequence would be that there would be more opportunity to debate and examine the means by which policy should be implemented. It would result in greater stability, in that big policy changes would have wider political support and, hence, would be far more likely to endure a change of government. In today’s increasingly complex world, new policy takes a long

Fletcher, David 1952– :"These people should be locked up and the keys thrown away!!!"

The Politician. 3 April 2014. Fletcher, David, 1952- :[Digital cartoons published from 2001 onward]. Ref: DCDL-0027740. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. http://natlib.govt.nz/records/33724950

2 Public Sector December 2014

time to roll out and is always costly. Big swings make it more difficult to achieve agreed policy outcomes and very often result in the loss of significant public investment for little gain. Greater confidence in the broad direction of major policies would be likely to have economic benefit. Increased investment flows to destinations that have stability and reduced political risk, leading to new employment opportunities. In turn, this would support the implied social contract underpinning our system of government. I am not suggesting that the major political parties should become clones of each other and that differences of approach should be ignored. Far from it. What I am advocating is that there should be serious and focused discussion among major parties to seek to reach agreement wherever possible on broad economic and social policy outcomes, so that these can be pursued consistently over the long term with a better chance for success. At the same time, let there be constructive debate on what might be the best way of implementing those policies; sound analysis of competing ideas is much more likely to result in fit-for-purpose ways of achieving the outcomes desired by all New Zealanders. Is this too idealistic? Perhaps, but it is nevertheless worth reflecting on the fact that most New Zealanders respond better to constructive ideas than they do to negative criticisms. Most New Zealanders showed in the 2014 election that they preferred incremental to radical change. As a people, as our move to MMP illustrates, most New Zealanders prefer consensual approaches to the more confrontational ways of past politics. I would like to see our political leaders respond accordingly.

IPANZ NEWS

Exploring How Auckland Works

ellington public servants gained a greater understanding of how Auckland governance works at an IPANZ seminar in November. “We organised the How Auckland Works seminar because we saw a knowledge gap,” says IPANZ General Manager Lewis Rowland. “Wellingtonians need to understand how Auckland works and why central government needs to engage differently with Auckland.” One of the speakers at the seminar Paul James, Deputy Chief Executive of Policy, Regulatory and Ethnic Affairs at the Department of Internal Affairs says, “Auckland matters and, in many respects, it’s different to the rest of New Zealand.” Another speaker, Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer at Auckland Council says, “New Zealand’s success depends on Auckland’s success. If Auckland succeeds, New Zealand will succeed and if Auckland fails, New Zealand will fail. Auckland generates one-third of New Zealand’s GDP. It is unusual for a country to have one centre with such a big influence on the economy.” Blakeley says, right from its formation, Auckland Council wanted to have a highly collaborative relationship with central government.

For example, legislation that set up the Auckland Council prescribed the development of a regional plan to take into account the economic, cultural and social needs of the city for the next 20 years. Auckland Council led the development of the Auckland Plan, including collaboration with the then Ministry of Economic Development. “The Auckland Plan is one of the best in the country. It’s been well peer reviewed internationally,” Blakeley says. Paul James says local government has devolved decision-making powers. Councils can set rates and make choices without reference to government. “But from a citizen point of view, they don’t really care whether central or local government fixes their problems. This requires central and local government to be really joined up. We all must consider, ‘What do we want to achieve for businesses and individuals?’” The seminar featured case studies, involving local and central government collaboration – Special Housing Areas and the Auckland Economic Development Strategy. Blakeley says, “On the housing front, we signed the Auckland Housing Accord and set up the Housing Project Office, a one-stop

Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer, Auckland Council and Paul James, Deputy Chief Executive, Policy and Regulatory and Ethnic Affairs, Department of Internal Affairs. office for housing issues. And with economic development we ensured the Auckland economic strategy was aligned with the Government’s growth agenda.” The seminar attracted about 70 participants from 25 different government organisations, local councils and private companies.

Top public management student recognised

athalie Harrington was recently awarded the IPANZ Public Management Prize for top marks in a third-year course in public management at the School of Government, Victoria University. Dr Michael Macaulay, Director, Institute for Governance and Policy Studies and Associate Professor (Public Management) says, “Our winner is the richly deserving Nathalie Harrington, who was a genuinely brilliant student. I’m really pleased she is being recognised.” Nathalie did the public management course last year, as part of her BA in Public Policy

and Chinese language, and she’s been conjointly studying Law. Advised by Victoria’s careers advisers to pick up Public Policy at level 2, she says it works well with studying Law. “Public policy makes so much sense having done law. It helps you consider practical solutions to ‘here’s a huge problem; how can we fix it’.” One of her assignments was to work with other students to write a mock conference paper considering the results of two of the Better Public Services targets. “I liked the Public Management paper. It gave you

practical tools, such as how to write a Cabinet paper, so that you could step into a policy advisor role in a government department.” Nathalie is a tutor for the introduction to public policy, and also property law. She’s been part of the Law School’s Wellington Community Justice Project, which offers research and legal education, for three years. Nathalie’s got her future mapped out. She has a summer research role within the Law School, looking at Māori jurisprudence; and will graduate mid-2015. She has six months

of travel to look forward to before starting work at Russell McVeagh in 2016. IPANZ sponsors the Public Management Prize (worth $500) to show its support for the next generation studying governance and public policy. December 2014 Public Sector 3

Interchange – where Local authorities have the challenge of serving their communities on the one hand, while also implementing many of central government’s regulations on the other. Editor SHELLY FARR BISWELL takes a closer look at the relationship between local and central government to find out how it’s working.

he Department of Internal Affairs is responsible for key legislation establishing our system of local government, its funding and process for elections and the counterpart of the Official Information Act, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act. As DIA Deputy Chief Executive Paul James says, the DIA’s interests include ensuring the overall local government system performs well and is fit for purpose. “While councils are accountable to their communities rather than central government, if done well, constructive dialogue between central and local government should deliver significant benefits to the Government, local authorities and wider New Zealand,” he says. Local Government New Zealand Principal Policy Advisor Mike Reid says it’s a complex relationship, however, and is influenced by the status and role of a local government system, the trust that has been built up between the Government and local government’s peak bodies and the

4 Public Sector December 2014

nature of mutual expectations. “Local government is under constant tension between meeting citizens’ expectations and their willingness to pay, while also carrying out their regulatory responsibilities. While this is a natural – even healthy – tension, it’s exacerbated by the fact that local government in New Zealand has a very high level of constitutional uncertainty.” Reid says that as a “creature of statute” local government is not embedded in New Zealand’s constitutional fabric – a condition that colours the relationship between central and local government. It’s a relationship that is unusual in the developed world, with even Australian states having an explicit mandate for local government. “In New Zealand, essentially local government serves at the discretion of Parliament. Historically, councils have been able to exercise considerable discretion, but recent legislation has given central government a broad and unprecedented ability to involve itself in council decision-making and this also sits in the background of how central and local government interact,” Reid says. To provide more certainty and transparency in the local and central government relationship, LGNZ would like to see an accord between the two. It’s an approach that has worked to good effect in places like Scotland and Canada. “An accord would allow the government of the day and local government leadership to articulate the overarching objectives,

accountabilities and expectations over the course of each parliamentary term.” The accord could underpin the local and central government forums that have been held since 2000. The annual forum (they used to be held biannually) brings together the prime minister and key Cabinet ministers from the Government and the LGNZ leadership that comprises about 12 mayors and 2 regional council chairs to discuss key issues for the year. “An accord could make the annual forum more productive and would then serve as an opportunity to check in and calibrate our work programmes,” Reid says. The idea of an accord falls along similar lines as a recommendation from the New Zealand Productivity Commission in their Towards Better Local Regulation (May, 2013) for the development of a Partners in Regulation protocol to better guide central and local government engagement. In its July 2014 written response to the Productivity Commission’s recommendation, the Government said, “The value and effectiveness of a formal joint mechanism, however, are questionable, and improvements can be achieved without one.” Instead of a formal protocol, the Government noted that improvements would be made to the Cabinet Office Manual, Cabinet Guide, and other central government guidance and documentation. “Recommendation 5.2 [Partners in Regulation protocol] brings

central and local government meet

attention to the lack of reference in the Cabinet Office Manual to the need to consult effectively with local government during policy development (while the Cabinet Guide and other secondary guidance does). To resolve this, the Cabinet Office Manual will be amended.” Although it seems the reference will also allow for a continued sense of impermanence with the response going on to say, “If any mechanism to improve collaboration between central and local government is developed, this will be reviewed periodically, and in collaboration with the local government sector. It is unlikely that any mechanism for local and central government collaboration will seek to bind the signatories.” In terms of updating central government documents, the Treasury revised its Preliminary Impact and Risk Assessment template in July 2013. The template now includes an additional prompt for departments to consider whether the options being considered would have significant costs or benefits on local government. The revised template also requires

departments to consider whether there is a possibility that local government will be expected to implement, administer or enforce any options.

government. For local government, there is frustration that central government agencies “lack respect for, and understanding of, local government’s role and purpose”. For The regulatory central government, Mike Reid, Principal Policy Advisor, conundrum there are concerns Local Government As the Productivity around monitoring New Zealand Commission noted and enforcement, in its final report, along with delays local government and inconsistency in regulatory activity sits within a regulatory performance. As the report notes, “The wider regulatory system, stating, “the regulatory system as a uneasy interaction between whole determines the quality of central and local government regulatory outcomes”. is having a detrimental effect Is the system working? on New Zealand’s regulatory According to the findings of the system.” Productivity Commission, not as Mike Reid also believes the well as it could be. response to “fix” the regula“Some of the problems stem tory system has so far been to from the design of regulations be more prescriptive and to add at the central government level, complexity which limits the abilsome are problems with the way ity to innovate and be flexible. regulation is implemented and Ironically, at the same time the administered by local government regulatory environment appears and, lastly, there are generic to be more risk averse, there’s weaknesses with the regulatory a growing international awaresystem as a whole.” ness that place-based responses to The Productivity Commission issues are more effective (see the found at the core of many of interview with David Albury on the problems is the relationship page 9). between central and local >

December 2014 Public Sector 5

“Many of the issues that the local government sector deals with require central and local government to work together if good outcomes are to be achieved in areas like affordable housing, economic development and environment-related matters.” undermining the reputation of an individual local authority and the reputation of the sector.” However, for local government the current legislative environment can be stifling. As Mike Reid explains, “It’s easy to forget that someone on the other end of all those regulations needs to monitor them and ensure they are implemented as intended. It’s a huge job and it seems there is often an inverse correlation between complexity and accountability requirements and the ability for local authorities to effectively implement those regulations.” Interestingly, the “weightiness” of the regulatory environment for local government seems to be symptomatic of a wider issue as the Productivity Commission’s more recent report ( July 2014) exposed when looking at New Zealand’s regulatory institutions and practices. As Murray Sherwin, Chair of the New Zealand Productivity Commission, said in his speech at the ANZSOG Annual Conference in Canberra, Australia recently (see September/October issue), “The New Zealand Parliament is busy.

It sits for only around 90 days each year, but in that time passes four times more public Acts than the UK parliament manages… We face increasing complexity from growing diversity – of expectations and risk appreciation and risk tolerance; rapid change, especially technology driven; inconsistencies in our statutes with respect to: institutional form of regulators; appeal rights; consultation obligations; Treaty of Waitangi provisions; and funding mechanisms. Complex regulation is often poor regulation. And poor regulation undermines administrative fairness, social cohesion and a sense of political legitimacy.”

Closing the loop

To address at least part of the issue in our regulatory environment, when the Government released its response to the commission’s report, Local Government Minister Paula Bennett also announced the establishment of the Rules Reduction Taskforce to “weed out pedantic and unnecessary rules that frustrate property owners and councils alike”. This spring, the minister

announced that the Rules Reduction Taskforce is to be jointly chaired by Jacqui Dean MP, Parliamentary Private Secretary for Local Government, and Michael Barnett ONZM, Chief Executive of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce. Other taskforce members are to be announced shortly and will include central and local government experts, and specialists from the building and trades sector. As part of the Rules Reduction initiative, citizens can now go online (www.govt. nz/rulesreduction) and submit examples of property regulations and local rules that seem out-dated or onerous. The information gathered through the initiative will be considered by the taskforce and will inform its analysis and recommendations.

Getting it right According to the Productivity Commission’s report, a circuit breaker is needed to “reset” the relationship between central and local government “to improve the efficiency and effectiveness with which the regulatory system operates”.

> continued on page 8

“When the Local Government Act 2002 came into effect there were about 375 pages to the Act, today there’s about 550 pages and that’s with the recent amendments that were meant to reduce some redundancies in reporting,” he says. In fact, the regulatory environment includes about 30 pieces of primary legislation spelling out the bulk of local government’s responsibilities and a number of secondary pieces of legislation impacting on other regulatory activities. For central government all this regulation can provide an increased sense of confidence. Based on the Office of the Auditor-General’s overall findings through the annual local authority audits this quest for confidence may be warranted. As Auditor-General Lyn Provost noted in her overview of the results of the 2012/2013 local authority audits: “Near enough is not good enough.” She writes, “Although I consider that communities are well served by their local authorities, my Office has observed practices – often practices that have evolved over time – that are out of step with statutory requirements. Many of the actions might, in themselves, seem minor, but their cumulative nature risks

6 Public Sector December 2014

On the road: NZTA and local communities

ne of the agencies earning praise from local authorities is the New Zealand Transport Agency. Recently NZTA released its Funding Assistance Rates. The FAR spell out how central government land transport co-funding will be distributed over the next nine years. With the release of the FAR, Local Government New Zealand President Lawrence Yule thanked NZTA for its “extensive engagement with councils across New Zealand on the changes” and welcomed the “clarity this announcement brings on the available share of funding for local and regional roads”. Engagement doesn’t always mean complete agreement, and as Yule said on the release of the FAR, “Not all members will be happy with the decisions but the balance struck appears generally fair given the funding pool available. The Agency’s role is to allocate the funding pool provided by Government and Government’s role is to set the size of the funding pool.” Over the next nine years co-funding from NZTA will account for about 53 per cent of roading costs, with the rest made up mainly through local funding. Engagement and clarity on funding is just one aspect of NZTA’s commitment to working with communities. As a major asset manager, it is also working with local authorities to meet the Government’s goals as set out in the National Infrastructure Plan. The plan calls for ways

An important aspect of NZTA’s work is centred on working with local authorities in coastal areas where road disruptions can mean entire communities are cut off from crucial services. to build resilience into the national infrastructure networks to cope with significant disruptions, including major storms or gradual impacts such as sea-level rise. An important aspect of NZTA’s work is centred on engaging with local authorities in coastal areas where road disruptions can mean entire communities are cut off from crucial services. “Major storm events experienced throughout the Northland region have significant adverse effects on the communities that rely upon the safe and efficient operation of the state highway network,” NZTA Principal Environmental Scientist David Greig explained during a presentation he gave at the New Zealand Coastal Society’s annual conference. “The NZTA is taking steps to translate the expectations for effective coastal management into practical planning and delivery tools to assist those responsible for managing state highway infrastructure in the coastal environment,” he says. The NZTA is working with local authorities and other stakeholders to develop a draft Coastal Effects Assessment Guideline as one of those planning tools. “The guideline has been drafted to help infrastructure managers and decision-makers to better understand coastal issues and their impact on assets, such as roads and bridges.”

The guideline is made for practitioners and uses checklists and a risk assessment process to create a picture of the asset and the coastal environment. “It provides a systematic way to collect information on risks to assets and the surrounding coastal environment for both short- and long-term asset management. Importantly, it also walks users through a process that ensures they are looking across the entire section of a network, instead of just an isolated location,” he says. The more comprehensive approach means that NZTA and local communities can use adaptive management based on different scenarios and consider wider issues beyond just the structural integrity of an asset. “It’s a more holistic approach where communities can consider route security in case of disruptions, as well as planning for housing, economic development and social services in a more integrated way,” Greig says. The planning approach builds in community engagement and requires ongoing dialogue between central and local government. “Finalising this guideline and developing similar resources will help build resilience in our highway network and make sure local communities are better served.”

December 2014 Public Sector 7

The Productivity Commission went on to identify four areas where interactions between central and local government needs to improve. • There needs to be recognition that local authorities are co-producers of regulatory outcomes. • Incentives need to be in place to support rigorous policy analysis and accountability to ensure quality advice on regulatory issues is provided. • Central government agencies need to enhance their knowledge of the local government sector and increase their capability to undertake robust implementation analysis. • Central government needs to engage in meaningful engagement and effective dialogue

with local government early in policy development processes.

A new era?

The Government’s Better Local Government initiative was announced in 2012 and has already included two sets of changes to the Local Government Act 2002. The first changes were enacted at the end of 2012 and the second round of amendments came into effect on 8 August 2014. Together, the amendments make significant changes around development contributions, annual and long-term planning, infrastructure and asset management planning, and public consultation requirements. The amendments also include provisions that enable the Local Government Commission to

A brief history NEW ZEALAND has had a system of local government since the 1840s, although the framework that local government has worked under has changed dramatically through the years. As Mike Reid sets out in Rethinking the State Sector Act: Before 1989 there wasn’t a single local government voice. There were at least three local government organisations – the counties had their voice, the urban municipalities had their voice, and the catchment authorities and regional councils had their own voice. It wasn’t until just before the local government reforms that those voices were merged into a single voice for local government. This change meant that central government had a way of entering dialogue with local government at one place and one time. This change was quite an important step in building a relationship between central and local government. With the government of the day’s focus on contractualism in the 1990s, local government was generally seen as a service-delivery provider. Governments through those years were much more interested in the things that local government did rather than local democracy or local government as a sector… In 2002 things changed significantly. The Labour-led government at the time introduced the Local Government Act. One of the aims of the Act is to promote a partnership between central and local government. The idea of spheres of government having to work together to deal with meaty issues was well accepted and has continued through the 2000s.

8 Public Sector December 2014

establish local boards (similar to those in Auckland) as part of new unitary authorities, and in existing unitary authorities and create council-controlled organisations and joint committees as part of a reorganisation scheme. The amendments are expected to encourage more collaboration and shared services between local authorities, as well as to sharpen governance and consultation processes. There’s also a focus on strengthening reporting obligations, particularly assets, with the introduction of new requirements for infrastructure strategies and asset management planning requiring disclosure of risk management arrangements for physical assets in annual reports. Since the passage of the amendments to the Local Government Act, the DIA’s work on the Better Local Government programme has focused on supporting the implementation of the legislation. This has included publishing guidance for development contributions commissioners and technical guidance for local authorities, including an example infrastructure strategy, along with more general information for the general public. What the amendments do not address directly, however, is when and how central and local government should engage. It may be a missed opportunity, but it may also be that there are better ways than regulation to address this issue. In fact, Mike Reid is fairly optimistic about future interactions. “Quite a bit comes down to who the Local Government Minister is and how the Government wants to engage with local authorities. To give you a sense of the importance of that leadership, after we had one of our first forums with the prime minister at the time [Hon Helen Clark], the next day we heard from agencies we had been trying

to get through to for months that suddenly had a directive to work on several local and central government shared objectives.” Reid says the current Local Government Minister Paula Bennett is engaged and community oriented, which can have great bearing on local government’s ability to have access to officials and to see real progress in work programmes. “We are also seeing a number of agencies, such as the New Zealand Transport Authority, that are taking a proactive approach to working with local authorities and are getting better results because of that interaction. It just takes a few wins for both central and local government to see the benefits of working together.” In addition, as part of the DIA’s leadership role across local government issues, DIA Chief Executive Colin MacDonald and Society of Local Government Managers President Barbara McKerrow, jointly chair a Central Government Local Government Chief Executives Forum. The forum includes chief executives from government departments with an interest in local government issues and chief executives from a number of local authorities. The forum provides the opportunity for the chief executives to discuss and work through strategic issues of common concern. As Paul James says, “Many of the issues that the local government sector deals with require central and local government to work together if good outcomes are to be achieved in areas like affordable housing, economic development and environmentrelated matters. Better outcomes can be achieved through the two spheres of government working effectively together, while recognising the different roles they play.”

Innovation at the nexus Recently, David Albury, who is a Board Director for the UK’s Innovation Unit, came to New Zealand to discuss radical innovation in the public sector. We were able to talk with him about the importance of working across levels of government and if he had any insights into how New Zealand is faring in this area. How and why do different levels of government need to work together to bring about positive and lasting change?

This is an important issue, which fundamentally gets down to achieving significantly better outcomes for significantly lower costs. There has been a trend over the past 10 years towards more place-based experimentation in the public policy sphere. With that experimentation has come a gradual realisation that because citizens – the people who the policies are intended for – are organised around communities, place-based policies are often more effective and relevant. This means that both central and local government are critical to successful policy development and implementation. At the local level there is a need to test and refine policies that are appropriate in a community context, as well as to champion the changes. At the national level, there is a need to look for ways to generalise policies so there can be national uptake, while at the same time building in ways that policies can be adjusted based on local circumstances. This entails a bottom-up approach to policy-making. It requires local authorities to look for authentic solutions to challenges their communities are facing. For central

government, it requires supporting local solutions and making those solutions scalable. Central government also has an important role to play in brokering relationships and building communities of practice in areas such as health, education and the environment.

What are some of the barriers to innovation when it comes to working across levels of government?

Radical innovation is a new way of working. There’s not so much a barrier, as a lack of awareness on how to “get started”. From my experience, some people are naturally more sceptical when starting out on a project together, but with the right tools and the right methods, using “disciplined innovation” the barriers that might exist early on in a project seem to give way pretty quickly. What’s essential is that when tackling an issue, both central and local government are involved from the outset. There needs to be a commonality of purpose and their needs to be continuous engagement throughout. When working with communities we emphasise a focus on outcomes, appropriate engagement, ethnography, co-design, strengthening user networks, and co-determining use of resources. A similar approach

should be used across agencies and levels of government.

Can you provide an example of the impact a joined-up approach can make?

Like other developed countries, the UK has a burgeoning number of patients living with chronic health conditions, such as diabetes, depression and asthma, that require a different solution than the acute diseases that our healthcare system was initially set up to address. We knew there was a growing problem that required a radical solution both to improve the quality of life for those patients living with chronic health conditions and to reduce the fiscal strain on the National Health Service, so we developed a programme called People Powered Health. The programme supports the design and delivery of innovative services for people who are living with long-term health conditions. The programme was rolled out in several communities across the country to empower patients to be responsible for their own care – a fundamental shift in thinking and practice for patients and healthcare providers. Instead of being passive recipients of care, People Powered Health puts patients in the driving seat. Professionals use their clinical expertise to facilitate better health outcomes both directly and through linking patients to wider support networks. The programme has seen impressive results from better health outcomes and improved quality of life to reduced A&E visits and the number of planned and unplanned hospital visits. At the national level, we are working with agencies to develop flexible policies to support this approach and to find ways to make the programme scalable. We estimate that if the programme could be scaled up it would save the NHS £4.4 billion annually.

Any insights about the relationship between local and central government based on your recent visit?

The work that the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and Auckland Council are involved in with the proposed co-design lab is very exciting. This is precisely the joined-up approach that’s required to deal with real problems using a place-based approach. To learn more visit www.innovationunit. org or follow David Albury on Twitter @ davidalbury.

December 2014 Public Sector 9

– the search for excellence The New Zealand Police have had a number of successes this year, including exceeding their Better Public Service targets and attracting a number of awards at the 2014 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards for the various initiatives under their Policing Excellence focus. Writer CARL BILLINGTON looks at some of the changes that took place behind the scenes to make those successes possible.

olicing Excellence is a change programme that was initiated at the end of 2010 and has seen Police focus on crime prevention, building closer partnerships with communities and related agencies, and drawing on the latest technology to improve the way they deploy resources. “Policing Excellence has revolutionised the way we police and brought huge improvements in the results we deliver to the public we serve,” New Zealand Commissioner Mike Bush says. “Policing Excellence and the Prevention First operating model that underpins it have made us more mobile, visible, efficient and effective than ever before and our communities safer places to live, work and play. “This strategy means a reduction in the economic and social costs associated with crime, while reducing harm experienced by New Zealanders – and the use of tools such as iPhones and iPads has meant staff have the ability to work ‘on the go’ rather than 10 Public Sector December 2014

having to head back to a station.” It’s an approach that’s led to some solid results as well. Police have exceeded each of their initial targets that were set for the Policing Excellence programme – achieving a 20.1 per cent drop in recorded crime, 5.8 per cent increase in prevention activities and a 41.3 per cent reduction in non-traffic prosecutions; against targets of 13 per cent, 4 per cent, and 19 per cent, respectively. Creating this sort of success relies on gaining buy-in across an organisation; it can’t just come from the leadership team. To achieve this, Police relied on several key ingredients: clear and constant communication; clear and measurable targets for what they wanted to achieve; opportunities for staff to engage and help shape the development of the project from the start; and clear demonstrations of how the changes would add value to frontline staff. “Policing Excellence required a cultural and mindset shift away from being largely reactive and offender focused to being prevention and victim focused,” Bush says. “The fact we have been able to implement such a demanding programme so successfully while retaining high levels of staff engagement and increasing the public’s trust and confidence in Police is a testament to the commitment and professionalism of all NZ Police staff.”

Hutt Valley Justice Sector Innovation Project

While the Policing Excellence programme provides the umbrella for the changes Police

NZ Police

have achieved, the Hutt Valley Justice Sector Innovation Project is an example of how these shifts in thinking towards a prevention focus have also filtered through to how Police work together with other agencies. Inspector Mike Hill, Prevention Manager for the Wellington District, leads the Hutt Valley initiative. He says the way policing is done has significantly changed and adds that “given the benefits we have just continued to work this way”. The Hutt Valley Justice Sector Innovation Project was an initiative of frontline cooperation across multiple agencies that set out to reduce and prevent crime in the Hutt Valley. The project won the Public Sector Excellence Award for Achieving Collective Impact this year. The project has been so successful that the model is being expanded into three other locations across New Zealand. In addition, workshops have been held around the country to encourage all justice sector frontline managers to adopt a similar approach in their communities and regions. The seeds of the project began with the Justice Sector Leadership Board that was first established in 2011 to help drive performance across the system and coordinate major programmes and planning across the sector. It’s comprised of the chief executives of Police, the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Corrections. “It was at a leadership retreat on 10 July 2012,” Hill recalls. “The Leadership Board was looking for new approaches and was

IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector

Excellence Awards 2014 winner

“Policing Excellence has revolutionised the way we police and brought huge improvements in the results we deliver to the public we serve.” keen for something led by our frontline operational arm of the sector. I was asked to pull together a group that spanned Police, Justice, Corrections, and Child Youth and Family [Ministry of Social Development] and we decided to focus on the Hutt Valley as a pilot site.” “The first stage was to do an initial stocktake together. We began in September 2012 and were due to report back by 20 November 2012 with a summary of what was currently being done in the area, as well as what we would like to be able to do.”

Building trust

“Working through the stocktake together changed everything. It blew away our assumptions about each other and we learned more about each agency at both a strategic

and a local level,” Hill says. we also sought input from “We each had our own stakeholders in the communities targets to achieve. For us it was we serve too. That was really reductions in crime, reducing interesting as we discovered that prosecutions, and increased they assumed we were already proactive activity – we just working this way – as one assumed all the other agencies all integrated public service. In the knew that and understood our end, we settled on 10 initiatives main drivers. we wanted to focus on together “We realised that across the and we took that back to the New Zealand Police agencies we are often dealing Leadership Board,” Hill says. Commissioner with the same people and the In many ways that was the first Mike Bush same problems – but we had test for the project, on both sides. been viewing them through each The project team had shown it could deliver, of our own individual agency lenses.” having turned the stocktake and report As the team worked through the stocktake around in a short time frame. The next test together and grew in their awareness of each was seeing whether anything would come agency’s work, the opportunities for collaboof it. ration became clear. “The Leadership Board endorsed all of “We began building stronger relationships the recommendations and gave us permisvery quickly – as people were learning about sion and support to do the work. So throughsomething you would often hear them say, out 2013 we focused on implementing the 10 ‘That’s a wonderful initiative – maybe we can initiatives.” join that?’ “That level of permission and endorsement “As well as learning from each other, > for grassroots, frontline-led suggestions

Public Sector Powering into 2015 The election brakes are off and it is now full steam ahead into 2015. Key public sector initiatives are underway and demand for the best policy, communications and project management professionals is at an all-time high. Here is what we think is going to be in hot demand in 2015: Policy Managers and Senior Policy Analysts – The high demand for top quality policy professionals continues which is good news if you are thinking about the next step in your career? We are working with a number of managers motivated to fill their vacancies this side of Christmas. To register your interest please contact Kirsty Bidwell at kirsty.bidwell@h2r.co.nz Contractors – Heavy on-going demand for Policy Analysts at all levels, Project Managers and Change Managers. Georgina and Katerina Makarios want to hear from you if you are coming available in the next few weeks. georgina.makarios@h2r.co.nz and katerina.makarios@h2r.co.nz For more detail, go to our Hot Jobs page on www.H2R.co.nz or call us on 04 499 9471.

Kirsty Bidwell

Katerina Makarios

Georgina Makarios

December 2014 Public Sector 11

was critical. We felt close to the Leadership Board, but we were not micro-managed. Good leaders create the environment for others to deliver within and they did just that. That set the tone for the whole project,” Hill says. Commissioner Bush reinforces the emphasis on empowering others in his reflections on some of the things they have learnt from the overall Policing Excellence approach. “Put staff at the centre of all decisions. Don’t start with the technology; start with understanding the needs of those affected by any change. Engage as early as possible and involve them in coming up with ideas and solutions. Maintain good levels of communication and provide opportunities for staff to provide feedback and be involved in testing new systems, processes and technology. “Leadership at all levels of Police was critical. For example, one of the key things we did during the mobility project [the roll out of iPads and iPhones] was to engage and empower district champions, who varied in rank and position across all 12 Police districts, to support and mentor their colleagues through specific change processes.”

Creating a new culture “We have gone from talking about the 200 or so Police staff in the Hutt Valley, to talking about the 800 or so Justice Sector staff,” Inspector Hill observes, reflecting on some of the shifts that have been created as a result of the initiative.

“People are talking and thinkgreater reach together. It was ing more in terms of sectors now, much more efficient. rather than individual organi“It was the same with the sations. Things are being sorted Raising Achievement and by a few phone calls or even Attendance in Youth Sector text now that would have taken initiative. This initiative grew months before. beyond the four core agencies and “You can’t write a we ended up working together memorandum of understanding with local iwi, the rūnanga, and that says you will trust each the community law office as well. Inspector Mike Hill, other. You build that trust Not only did truancy reduce, but Prevention Manager, Wellington District by working together and lateness reduced as well. It was a understanding each other’s great outcome. world. As new people came on the project “I recall talking with one of the iwi leaders they received a very clear induction that ‘this who said to me, ‘You should have been doing is how we do business’. this all along’. He was absolutely right. The “We have built a really strong peer support difference now though was that we had the network across the agencies which has trusted relationships and the permissions in enormous benefit. And the team has had to place to make this possible,” Hill says. achieve all this while managing business as Making it last usual and with no additional funding. Team Ultimately, this became about much more members have a lot to be proud of,” Hill says. than meeting a new set of challenging, short“We were meeting monthly as a whole term targets. It became a whole new way group, dealing with the business and there of working. It wasn’t without challenges, were a lot of second and third order effects but in the process the team has established and benefits we started to see. a sustainable approach to working across “Taking a sector approach we’ve also organisational boundaries in ways that been able to develop staff and give them benefit our communities and is now working experience across the sector, rather than just to implement similar practices in other areas. in our own agency. We saw our own staff Commissioner Bush reinforces this coming together around the targets in our perspective, “Thanks to the changes we have own agencies too. It was such a positive made, we are now absolutely focused on experience for everyone,” Hill explains. preventing crime and meeting the needs of “The Operation Relentless campaign victims. We have harnessed the latest tech[focused sector-wide operations] was a great nology to deploy our resources in the right example – mobilising all agencies together places, at the right times, and we are building on a single crime driver, we achieved much

Public sector excellence

his year, the New Zealand Police won the Prime Minister’s Award for Public Sector Excellence and Excellence in Improving Public Value through Business Transformation for their programme Prevention First at the IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards. They also were joint winners along with the Ministry of Social Development, New Zealand Defence Force, and Inland Revenue for the Excellence in Improving Performance through Leadership Excellence for a cross-agency leadership development programme. They received the Excellence in Public Sector Communications Award for their Safer Summer speed enforcement campaign. And were recognised, along with the Ministry of Justice and Department of Corrections, with the Excellence in Achieving Collective Impact Award for their work on the Hutt Valley Justice Sector Innovation Project.

12 Public Sector December 2014

IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector

Excellence Awards 2014 winner

The 10 Hutt Valley Justice Innovation Project Initiatives Cross-sector Relationships Audio Video Links for Courts Restorative Justice End-to-end Processing Information Sharing Review of the Family Violence Court Mobile Office Raising Achievement & Attendance in Youth Sector (RAAYS) Operation Relentless (focused sectorwide operations) Māori Wardens in Court valuable and enduring partnerships with our communities and partner agencies to address the causes of crime and crashes. As a result, we are able to reinvest freed-up time into crime prevention activity and better support for victims. “There were, of course, challenges, but these were overcome with the support, commitment and agility of all NZ Police staff who saw the merits and benefits of making Policing Excellence a reality.” Inspector Hill adds, “Relationships are key but these also need to be supported by a robust project management methodology with clear accountability, clear targets and clear timeframes. It can’t just be about us or rely on specific personalities – otherwise it isn’t repeatable. Once you’ve got the shared systems and support in place, you can really focus on the relationships. I think we often underestimate how much can be done over a cup of tea with someone. “The team exceeded its targets, built closer relationships and developed more efficient processes than they’d ever had, without any extra resources or having any work taken off individual team members or reassigned elsewhere. And team members had fun. It’s a sustainable approach that can last for years – it’s just become the way we work now.”

Communicating change

Initially the news media wasn’t too interested in these initiatives, which forced the team to start managing the story and awareness – marketing directly to the communities in person and through community networks, rather than the media. This created a whole new set of connections, which had numerous benefits. “It also led to the mobile office, which is perhaps one of the most visible examples of the collaborative approach for the community – it’s a multi-agency mobile van that is out in the community and carries 13 different logos on its sides. It’s really visible and tangible,” Hill says. “This wasn’t about us – it was about the people in the communities who are trusting us to deliver a service. Many of these people we didn’t know and many probably don’t really want a direct relationship with the justice system. “We have all grown in terms of our understanding of the sector – both the issues the sector faces and the many great things that are already happening across the sector,” Hill says. “You can achieve so much more when you have the trust of your leaders as we did. You have got to play a long game and develop that rapport with each other.”

The future

Reflecting on the changes that have been achieved under the Policing Excellence programme overall, Commissioner Bush says Policing Excellence was a vast strategic change programme with many moving parts – traversing new business processes and systems through to the need to train and equip frontline staff with new technology. “The mindset shift to Prevention First and Victim Focus was a big challenge, but once staff saw the benefits of this approach the momentum gathered. Using realworld examples from the frontline helped tell the story. Ours is a 24/7 operation so understanding the varied environments our staff operate in and being able to address their concerns with valid solutions is vital. “Maintaining staff engagement and enthusiasm over a long period was also challenging. This comes back to ensuring we communicated the right message, through the right channels at the right time. People talk of ‘change fatigue’. In Police, we’ve come to refer to it as ‘change resilience’ – we know we can do it if the change rationale and end game is sound. “We are currently working on Police Excellence: The Future where we – in tandem with partner agencies – will look to make even further impact by doing things differently and better.”

Photos courtesy of the New Zealand Police.

December 2014 Public Sector 13

Better Public Services and digital transformation

How is the government addressing Better Public Services Result 10 – New Zealanders can complete their transactions with government easily in a digital environment? Writer JOHN O’LEARY reports.

emember how you used to withdraw money at the bank? You would write a cheque to yourself, take it along to a branch and cash it. And remember how you checked your bank balance? You would wait till the monthly statement arrived in the post, or else make another trip to the branch to ask for your balance that day.

14 Public Sector December 2014

Today, after two decades of continuous technological innovation, such activity seems quaint. Thanks to the Internet, much retail banking is now carried out online, instantly and conveniently. It’s becoming rare to write a cheque, and up-to-date account balances are available on your computer screen any time of the day or night. You can even arrange a mortgage online – an

unheard of notion even a few years ago. The revolution in retail banking illustrates how quickly and effectively an industry in the private sector has capitalised on the potential of the digital environment to offer seamless, customer-focused service. It’s a subject the government has been thinking about. Why can’t citizens interacting with ministries and agencies enjoy similarly instant, convenient service? According to Peter Newell,

Programme Manager Digital Transformation at the Department of Internal Affairs, there’s no reason. “The technology exists. It’s just a matter of updating the way we think about how citizens and government interact in their dealings with each other. Governments in other countries in the developed world, such as the UK and Denmark, are moving in the same direction, and are putting in place a variety of measures to make such digital interaction the everyday norm. “In Estonia, in particular, this

shift to an online environment is very advanced.” [For more on Estonia’s digital revolution, see sidebar story.] The idea of seamless, customer-focused government services lies behind Result 10, the final component of the Better Public Services programme instituted by the Government in 2012. Result 10’s goal is to see 70 per cent of New Zealanders’ most common transactions with government being completed in a digital environment by 2017. It’s an ambitious target, says Newell, but achievable, given that almost 40 per cent of such transactions are already done digitally, and the percentage is steadily rising. As an example of what’s happening already in this area, Newell points to SmartGate, the automated, digitally based customs service offered by New Zealand Customs which many travellers will be familiar with from leaving or arriving at the country’s main airports. “Originally, only those over 18 could use the service, but now children 12 and over can too. Latest figures show that just

“The system is being designed so that people remain in control of how much information they are willing to have shared... To a great extent it will be up to the individual as to how ‘online’ they want to be in terms of their interaction with government.” over half of travellers leaving or arriving at our main airports used SmartGate, up about a third compared to last year.” “Another good example of what’s already been achieved comes from the Inland Revenue. Latest figures show that over 87 per cent of tax returns are now filed digitally. “Other transactions which are steadily shifting online include things like renewing an adult passport, paying a fine, renewing a vehicle licence and applying for an immigration visa.”

Easier access

Benefits for the citizen of this shift to digital interaction, it is predicted, include easier access to government services, increased satisfaction with those services, and greater uptake of entitlements by eligible customers. Benefits for government include

reduction in the cost of servicedelivery infrastructure, reduced per-transaction costs, and greater realisation of objectives in terms of entitlement and compliance. To help guide this stepchange in how citizens interact with government, a Digital Services Council has been set up comprised of representatives from eight government agencies: DIA; IRD; Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment; New Zealand Customs; New Zealand Transport Agency; New Zealand Police; Ministry of Social Development; and the Department of Conservation. The DIA acts as the overall lead agency, and a governance group composed of general managers, chief information officers and the like meets every month to govern the council’s activities, which include reporting, funding and the provision of advice. Two large ministries – Health and

Peter Newell, Programme Manager Digital Transformation, DIA

Education – are not represented on the council to date, though in time they too will be contributing to the transformation envisaged in Result 10. Councils, governance groups and ministries: it sounds complicated and bureaucratic, but the ultimate aim is simple – to offer citizens easy, hassle-free access to a range of government services relevant to them and their situation. “In the past,” says Newell, “if you had to deal with the government in relation to a significant life event – the birth of a child, say, or immigration to New Zealand – you have had to know which government agencies to contact and then go about >

A digital vanguard – Estonia n image of how New Zealand might look in five or 10 years in terms of its online interactions is provided by Estonia, a Baltic nation that was for many years part of the Soviet empire. When that empire fell apart in the late 1980s, Estonia was faced with the problems inherent in being a country of small size and few natural resources. If the government was going to offer its citizens Western-style services, it was going to have to do it cheaply and efficiently – hence the decision to opt for online interaction. Today, Estonia is one of the most digitally connected nations in the world. Using a national identity card embedded with a microchip in conjunction with a PIN, Estonians can gain access to thousands of services, including banking, business registration and even fishing licenses. Tax returns are filed on the web within minutes, and about a third of voters cast their ballots online.

Separate, but connected Estonia also relies on a government-run technology infrastructure, called X-Road, which links public and private databases into the country’s digital services. All personal information is kept on separate servers and behind distinct security walls of government agencies, but the system allows the state and businesses like banks to share data when individuals give consent. Estonians do not seem overly worried that their privacy might be compromised. “If we had a centralised system, it would be a privacy concern,” said Taavi Kotka, Estonia’s chief information officer. “But nobody has the whole picture. Everything is separate, but connected.” Source: New York Times, “Estonians Embrace Life in a Digital World”.

ATMs in the indoor bus station, Estonia, Tallinn, 2014.

December 2014 Public Sector 15

getting in touch with each one. The process could be confusing and time consuming. The idea now is to make a package of relevant government services easily and conveniently available online. Soon, for example, you will be able to register a birth via a website, at the same time acquiring a tax number for the new child.” The next step will be to integrate things like social entitlements (if the child or family are eligible) into the birth registration process. “It’s government operating in a seamless, joined-up fashion and making it easier for citizens to interact with the agencies they need to.” But hang on, what about those members of the public who can’t or don’t want to interact with government digitally?

Not locked out

Government, says Newell, recognises that there is a small

part of the population that prefers more traditional ways of interacting. “These people are not going to be locked out of government services. We are looking at different ways to support customers who want to interact with us in non-digital ways. “A good example of this is the New Zealand Government Centre, Durham Street, Christchurch, which was set up following the earthquakes to cater for people who no longer had permanent places to deal with government. Visitors to the centre are met by staff and helped with their online interactions. Those who are unfamiliar with digital services get a chance to learn about them in a supported environment.” This all sounds well and good, but a question does arise concerning the security measures surrounding this shift to online interaction with government, given the

possibility of fraud and, in particular, the creation of false online identities by ill-intentioned individuals.

Security

“It’s a question the government takes very seriously,” says Newell. “Crucial to Result 10’s ambitious vision is the widespread adoption of RealMe, a secure authentication service formerly known as igovt. Currently, most people who use RealMe have a name and a password, so they can log in and access certain government web services. “Over 30,000 people, however, have taken the next step and possess RealMe verified accounts, something which allows them to securely pass on information about themselves, such as their identity and address. Relevant personal information can then be shared between agencies, helping them produce the kind of seamless, joined-up service

envisioned by Result 10. “RealMe is key to the success of Result 10, and we hope to see many more people setting up verified accounts in the future.” For some people, of course, the large-scale sharing of digitised personal information between government agencies provokes troubling questions. Could it be another step along the way to a Big Brother surveillance state? Newell acknowledges the concern, but does not see the shift to online interactions with government as something sinister. “The system is being designed so that people remain in control of how much information they are willing to have shared. If you want, you can opt out, though this may mean you do not receive the integrated service other people are getting. “To a great extent it will be up to the individual as to how ‘online’ they want to be in terms of their interaction with government.”

The Whitehall Effect PUBLIC sector reform has been underway for 30 years in the UK. Author and longtime critic of the UK’s reform programme, John Seddon, has recently released The Whitehall Effect, how Whitehall became the enemy of great public services and what we can do about it. In this book, Seddon looks at how successive UK governments have failed to deliver services to the public and exposes the problems that three decades of “political fads, fashions and bad theory” have caused. Seddon says that behind the idea of a crisis in public services caused by mounting demand is the reality that the crisis is not generated by demanding customers, but by the failure of services to deal effectively with the customers the first time around. This creates the need for more contacts, more explanation and more activity which are all forms of failure demand. He proposes that public services need redesigning, not cutting, with a deep understanding of the needs of citizens.

16 Public Sector December 2014

Seddon describes what this means in practice and encourages those who provide services to the public to engage with the experience of the customer. Lord Victor Adebowale says in his foreword to The Whitehall Effect: “We need a new paradigm that puts the citizen/ customer first, drives value into the lives of recipients and costs less… This is the challenge behind what needs to be our 21st-century vision for services-tothe-public. The Whitehall Effect sets out the way we might deliver better services. It should be required reading for anyone who delivers a service to the public.” Published by Triarchy Press.

In brief Productivity Commission – inquiry into using land for housing

ing difficult to access for many. “Making it easier to access and use land for housing is an essential part of any response. Our inquiry will look at options for sourcing land, including new developments on the edges of cities, as well as intensifying housing within cities. We will also examine the factors that limit how land can be used, including the availability of infrastructure. “The ability to access and use land for housing is affected

by local government planning processes, such as District Plans, Long-Term Plans, resource consents, and local rules, such as height restrictions or minimum lot size rules. These processes help protect the environment and ensure communities have the services they need to prosper. But it’s equally important that they don’t unnecessarily restrict the supply of land for housing for our growing cities,” he said. The Productivity Commission

will be focusing on the local authorities in New Zealand’s fastest-growing areas, but is interested in learning about good practices and approaches everywhere, including from overseas. The Productivity Commission will release a draft report in May 2015 for submissions with the final report due to the Government on 30 September 2015. www.productivity.govt.nz © Rescuedave | Dreamstime.com - Aerial View Of Suburbs Photo

n November, the Productivity Commission released an issues paper on its inquiry into using land for housing. The deadline for submissions is 22 December 2014. “Housing affordability is a key challenge facing New Zealand, especially in our growing cities,” said Commission Chair Murray Sherwin with the release of the issues paper. “The limited availability and high price of land is a concern when housing is becom-

Audit committees in the public sector

he Office of the Auditor-General recently released a paper on Making the most of audit committees in the public sector. As noted in the paper’s introduction, “In 2008, we published a good practice guide about Audit committees in the public sector. Since then, we have spoken to many people who have told us that the main challenge in making committees work is the dynamic organisation of people and issues”. The purpose of this paper is not to provide another “best practice guide”, but instead to start a discussion “among all those involved with audit committees” with the aim of providing a way for people to learn from one another. As part of the discussion, the OAG is asking people to provide feedback on the paper and consider the following questions: • Do our messages resonate with you? • Have we identified the issues that a public sector audit committee experiences? What have we missed? • Is it clear how one might think about and explore addressing these issues? What else would you suggest? • Are there any resources you use to help carry out your audit committee role, or to address these issues, that we could recommend to others?

How people respond to the questions above will help the OAG in developing resources to assist the public sector in using audit committees to good effect. As the OAG has previously noted, “Audit committees have a valuable contribution to make in improving the governance, and so the performance and accountability, of public entities. They can play an important role in examining an organisation’s policies, processes, systems, and controls. An effective audit committee shows that an organisation is committed to a culture of openness and continuous improvement.”

Audit committees by the numbers • Over half (53 per cent) of the public entities the OAG surveyed have an audit committee. • About 80 per cent of public sector audit committees are considered effective. • Most ineffective audit committees do not have an independent chairperson. • Key areas covered by audit committees include external audit, financial reporting and corporate risk. Source: Making the most of audit committees in the public sector, OAG, 2014.

December 2014 Public Sector 17

Where politics and the public service meet – a conversation with Michael Webster For the political aficionados amongst us, Michael Webster must have one of the most enviable jobs in the public service. Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council in the Cabinet Office, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, he attends the weekly Cabinet meeting, witness to the country’s most important political decision-making. As ROSE NORTHCOTT finds out, it’s a role where the public service and politics meet. What does your job entail?

As Secretary of the Cabinet, I support the prime minister and the Cabinet as a collective in the operation of the Cabinet system. And then as Clerk of the Executive Council, I support the governor-general and the prime minister in the conduct of their constitutional duties, and in the case of the prime minister, the head of government role. Interestingly, my detailed job description and accountabilities are set out in the Cabinet Manual. This is because of the unique nature of these two roles, not least of which is I have particular independence within the broader DPMC. While I am accountable to my chief executive, I am also accountable to the prime minister and the governor-general for the work of the Cabinet Office.

What’s your relationship with the governor-general?

I have the privilege of being the governorgeneral’s principal advisor on the conduct of his or her constitutional role. It is the governor-general’s role to appoint a prime minister after an election, and on the advice of the prime minister to appoint the other ministers. One of my roles is to advise the governor-general in that space, and around that time act as a liaison between him or her and the new administration. I am also responsible for the team at Government House, who are focused on supporting the governor-general in his ceremonial, community and international roles.

18 Public Sector December 2014

How busy have you been following the general election?

I have just been saying to my family that I have hardly had a day off since the election! That’s just the way it is. There is a lot to be done, whether it is following what happens on election night and advising the prime minister and governor-general, to ensuring they are well supported when it comes to the appointment of new ministers, or the opening of Parliament. During the period of government formation, and pre- and postelection, we issue a fair bit of guidance to public servants and ministers on constitutional procedures.

What happens once the new government is formed?

Any new administration, including a returning one, is eager to hit the ground running. Our first job is to work with the prime minister on the resumption of normal Cabinet business, including developing the Cabinet committee structure and the meeting timetable, so full central government decision-making can get underway again. We are also focused on briefing new ministers to ensure they are well equipped to carry out their roles and functions. As part of our role we have a legislation coordination function, supporting the leader of the House in the resumption of parliamentary business and planning for the following year. Around this time we also commence the process of assisting incoming ministers to identify and manage any conflicts of interest.

How do you facilitate the weekly Cabinet meetings?

Cabinet normally meets on a Monday. I am there with my deputy secretary. We are the only two public servants who attend, which is an incredible privilege. My job is to ensure papers for discussion get to who they need to, to record the decisions, and to support the prime minister who chairs the meeting. I am not there to give policy advice.

You must be privy to some amazing discussions.

All sorts of things are discussed at Cabinet. I remember sitting in an emergency Cabinet meeting, called after the second Canterbury earthquake. That was a very hard day for everybody. Whether it’s international relations or health policy, economic policy or budget proposals, it all washes through the system to Cabinet for final approval.

How do you maintain the integrity of the role in such a political environment?

Where I work has an incredibly strong culture built around political neutrality, providing free and frank advice, and getting on and implementing decisions the Government makes. That strong culture is core, and critical to everyone who does this role, given the information we are privy to. The other thing about the reality of my role is that I constantly have to be personally careful about commenting about most things, whether it’s what may be in the budget or the Government’s policy on vulnerable children. I don’t express an opinion, which can make me very boring at dinner parties!

What previous jobs have you had?

I have had an interesting career, starting in 1989 after completing a BA (Hons) in poli-

tics and history – I later completed a Masters in Public Management. I had a short time at Treasury and then went to the State Services Commission where a very wise senior public servant told me that in terms of career planning I needed to broaden my experience. I thought that was very good advice and followed it. I spent around eight years with SSC with two years on secondment to the UK Cabinet Office. I then spent just under two years with the Department of Internal Affairs, followed by six years with the Wellington City Council as City Secretary. I joined the Cabinet Office as Deputy Secretary of the Cabinet (Constitutional and Honours) in July 2008, and was appointed to this role in March 2014.

Describe a typical day

On a Cabinet meeting day I might arrive at work in the morning and deal with emails that have come in overnight from the other side of the world. We maintain an active relationship with the office of the Queen of New Zealand on behalf of the prime minister, so there might be some emails from the Palace. I catch up on the Cabinet agenda with my deputy secretary. I then may meet with some of the team to discuss anything ranging from a matter about ministers’ interests, to some work we may be doing that has implications for the wider Realm of New Zealand – covering the Cook Islands, Niue and Tokelau. Cabinet meetings vary in length but could last up to 3.5 hours. After the meeting I catch up with my deputy secretary to discuss anything urgent that needs to be processed quickly. That might be followed by a discussion

with some of the team on a cross-agency exercise we are involved in, such as the process to consider changing New Zealand’s flag. In general, the Cabinet Office works closely with the rest of DPMC and a number of other agencies – such as SSC, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Crown Law, Visits and Ceremonial Office, Ministry for Culture and Heritage, Parliamentary Counsel Office and the Ministry of Justice – on a range of matters. The Cabinet Office’s responsibilities in relation to the regulation-making function of government mean that I could then have a discussion over any queries the House of Representatives’ Regulations Review Committee may have raised with us. I will catch up with the team in the Honours Unit about anything ranging from how our protocols and conventions in the honours area are evolving to suit New Zealand’s own sense of national identity, to the process for finalising a Bravery Awards list, to dealing with a proposal for a new medal. By now, the first of the fast-track Cabinet minutes will have arrived in my in-tray, to be approved, signed and distributed by the Cabinet Office registry as soon as possible. Another meeting with the team, this time focused on providing guidance to ministers and their offices on the need to take care, when speaking positively about the objectives and achievements of a business, to avoid slipping into explicitly endorsing or promoting that business. The Executive Council, of which all ministers are members, usually meets with the governor-general on a Monday afternoon.

Regulations and other Orders in Council are made there. I attend to facilitate the business of the Executive Council. At the end of the day there is also a pile of non-urgent papers and Cabinet minutes in my in-tray. To meet my performance targets those minutes need to be signed and distributed without delay. That is just an average day. It’s the most fantastic job in terms of variety and pace and the interesting work that comes through my office on a daily basis. The Cabinet Office is one of six units within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. With 22 staff, it has five key functions: • There is a secretariat function that includes arranging meetings, preparing summaries of papers, attending meetings and recording the decisions. This function includes supporting the CabNet Project that is to digitise the paper-based systems used for receipt and distribution of Cabinet papers and minutes. • Another function is focused on advising the governor-general and prime minister on a range of legal, constitutional and other policy matters, for example, ministers’ interests, portfolio responsibilities and delegation queries, relationship with the head of state, and the exercise of constitutional responsibilities. • Another aspect to the role is supporting the leader of the House in setting and managing the Government’s annual legislation programme. • Still another function, includes supporting and advising the Government on the operation of the New Zealand Royal Honours System. • Finally, there is a registry function that includes compiling and keeping the record of executive government.

December 2014 Public Sector 19

Future gazing and the public sector

20 Public Sector December 2014

For this issue, we asked State Services Minister PAULA BENNETT and Labour State Services Spokesperson CHRIS HIPKINS for their views on some of the opportunities and challenges they see for the public sector. Below are their responses. State Services Minister Paula Bennett

People often ask me what I think New Zealand’s greatest asset is, and my response sometimes surprises them. To me, it’s not our stunning scenery or enviable way of life. The greatest asset we have, in my opinion, is our size. We are a small country, which means we are compact and connected. It also means that changes made on a national level, within central government, have a faster and greater impact on our citizens compared to bigger countries. This means we have an enormous responsibility as leaders in government and as public sector employees to get things right. I am extremely excited to take on the role of State Services Minister. Our state sector is highly regarded internationally, thanks in no small part to the work that public servants do. It is also undergoing the biggest transformation in a generation. We now have opportunities across government to make a greater collective impact, a top priority for this Government. Our compact size should make this easy, but we face a big challenge in shifting the way we think and work away from the traditional ‘vertical’ system, with officials in one agency working up towards one minister, and back down again. This system works well in many areas, but it simply doesn’t translate when we need to collaborate across agencies to get better outcomes for people. Our Better Public Services initiative has seen a sharper focus placed on the state sector than ever before, particularly on how we can be quicker, more flexible and collaborative. We are well on track to achieving targets in areas such as reducing welfare dependency and boosting skills, and have already exceeded the targets for reducing crime. There’s still work to do, and momentum is key to achieving what we have promised. Another big challenge lies in addressing the increasing complexity of New Zealanders’ lives, especially our most vulnerable. The services we design, implement and provide need to be flexible and effective to help

people navigate the wide range of issues they face on a day-to-day basis. Part of this will involve getting smarter with how we use data and information, while also balancing people’s privacy rights. The development of the Vulnerable Kids Information System (ViKI) is a good example. As Social Development Minister I saw too many examples of child abuse occurring when more than one agency held a piece of the puzzle. The health worker knows the mum, the probation officer knows the dad, and the kindy teacher knows things aren’t right, but a child at risk of abuse can’t wait until they are assaulted before we join the dots. This has to happen before abuse occurs, and ViKI, along with predictive risk modelling, are a crucial step towards this. I want to see forward-looking and joinedup thinking, and action, happening in other places where people and government services interact, along with the involvement of iwi, community organisations and even businesses where possible. Engaging better with people on proposals or policies that affect them is also a priority. Nobody knows better what works and what doesn’t than people using frontline services every day, so we need to make it easier for them to contribute ideas and options. This may mean changing our standard policy development process across government, it may mean creating new systems online for people to have a say, or it may mean something completely new we haven’t thought of yet – something that really encourages people to engage in the government’s decision-making process. This is a challenge I am excited about addressing, and I hope you are too. There is no doubt agencies are working harder than ever to achieve better results for people. They are working collectively – across business units and departments – and they are finding new ways to work effectively. This is making a difference, but we are only at the beginning of what we can achieve. Ultimately, what is good and successful for people is good for government. As Kiwis we are connected to each other in so many ways, and as a public service we need to work to harness this asset, and use it in a way that truly helps people to get ahead.

Labour State Services Spokesperson Chris Hipkins

The reforms of the New Zealand public service in the late 80s and early 90s shifted the focus away from ‘inputs’ towards ‘outputs’. The challenge for the public service today is to shift that focus further towards outcomes. Rather than looking at ‘what’ we are doing, we need to ask more fundamental questions about ‘why’ we deliver certain public services and whether current modes of delivery are fit for purpose in the 21st century. The current Government’s focus on a narrow range of better public service targets could hinder, rather than foster these types of deeper questions. Government departments and agencies will be focused on meeting the numerical targets (which by definition are easily measurable) while some of the more fundamental questions remain unanswered. For example, it’s all very well to focus on getting students to achieve NCEA level 2 qualifications, but what happens if they then leave school and end up on an unemployment benefit? A more holistic target would measure what students are doing one, two and five years after their schooling has finished. It would be much more challenging to measure, but much more meaningful. An immediate challenge for the public service is how to quantify the unquantifiable in order to satisfy the current drive for greater accountability. To meet the challenges of the 21st century, the whole public service needs to be better connected and more responsive to the needs of citizens. Despite recent reforms, too many agencies still operate within silos. Citizens should have easily accessible, single points of contact for a range of services and support. There is no excuse for one agency referring a citizen from one agency to another. The public sector needs to function seamlessly. The Labour Party will be monitoring progress on the current Government’s Better Public Services targets closely, while also pointing out where the targets are deficient (for example, their emphasis on tertiary rather than primary and public health). We will continue to push for a more connected and responsive public sector, one that focuses on the needs of citizens, rather than the needs of the service itself. December 2014 Public Sector 21

nvironment Canterbury’s Regional Planning Manager Brett Aldridge says the genesis of the process came about due to the need to close a gap in the regional council’s regulatory toolbox. Options for dealing with people who commit environmental offences were limited to infringement fines or prosecution. “Fines were often too little and, while providing some deterrent, are only of financial benefit to the regional council; and conviction can be disproportionate to the level of offending. We needed something in-between,” Aldridge says. Many environmental offences

22 Public Sector December 2014

aren’t the result of deliberate or deceptive activities. Often the offence is the result of careless attempts at land or water use when the person doesn’t realise the affect their actions will have on the environment. Environmental regulation can be complex and what is required to avoid environmental offending is often not well understood. “We wanted a restorative process to include reparation and apology. If a person who commits an environmental offence wants to make amends, the community and victims affected should benefit. The traditional restorative justice process didn’t give us the opportunity to withdraw

charges where we could get a better outcome than prosecution, so we combined the principals of restorative justice with the Police Adult Diversion system,” Aldridge says. This process had been evolving over several years. Aldridge gives an example of a story that occurred about six years ago: A South Canterbury farmer, on rolling hill country, decided to fence off streams to keep stock out. But his stock still needed water – and now the stream was inaccessible. He ploughed up the

Photo: Environment Canterbury.

The winner of the new Excellence in Regulatory Systems Award – introduced for the 2014 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards – was Environment Canterbury for its alternative environmental justice process, a first in New Zealand. Just how did Environment Canterbury take the idea of restorative justice and apply it to environmental crimes? IPANZ Communications Adviser MARGARET MCLACHLAN finds out.

Photo: Department of Conservation: Te Papa Atawhai

Environmental justice in Canterbury

centre of the stream to install a water pipe – seriously damaging the streambed and environs, which also supported an eel nursery. Environment Canterbury laid charges and, with the farmer’s agreement, trialled a restorative justice conference with affected parties, including the rūnanga, Fish & Game New Zealand, Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand, and local farmers. “It was a very powerful process; the farmer had to eyeball Outcomes through the Alternative Environmental Justice process can have positive results. In this case, the South Canterbury farmer paid for stream assessments, removed the exposed pipe, paid costs and agreed to a media statement about the offending.

IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector

Excellence Awards 2014 winner

“The outcomes are better for the environment, for the community involved and for the offender. It helps build good, ongoing relationships.” the people he’d affected. It was hard for him – and at one stage he considered facing prosecution rather than proceed – but he’d bought into the process and saw it through.” The offender paid for stream assessments, removed the exposed pipe, paid costs and agreed to a media statement about the offending. Successes like this led to the formation of a rigorous process and set of criteria for Alternative Environmental Justice. Established in 2012, a total of 12 cases have now been through this process. Aldridge explains that if an offence is deemed suitable for restorative justice, charges are laid before the District Court. The case can still proceed to prosecution if either party wants to opt out of the alternative process. The offender and the victims attend an Alternative Environmental Justice conference. Aldridge explains that it is possible to identify the victims of environmental crime. While

in most cases the environment is the victim, representatives can be identified to take part in the process, for example, Fish and Game, Forest and Bird, the Department of Conservation, and tangata whenua. “The offender has to admit guilt, otherwise there’s no genuine desire for restoration.” A third-party provider, such as Restorative Justice Services Otautahi or Project Turnaround Timaru, holds the conference between the offender and the victims, helps decide on a restoration plan, and reports back to the court. The conference allows the victims to express their feelings and talk about the effect of the offending. It also allows the offender to express remorse and apologise. All parties gain an understanding of their positions and they agree on the remediation steps. “One problem with restorative justice is you need the mechanism to make sure any promises made actually happen. With this process we don’t withdraw charges until

Representatives from the Alternative Environment Justice project at the 2014 IPANZ Gen-i Public Sector Excellence Awards (left to right): Anne Columbus, Inspections and Enforcement Unit Manager, Christchurch City Council; Don Chittock, Programme Manager Strategic Programmes, Environment Canterbury; Dame Margaret Bazley, Chair, Environment Canterbury; Bill Bayfield, Chief Executive, Environment Canterbury; David Perenara-O’Connell, Programme Manager Ngāi Tahu Relationships, Environment Canterbury; and Iain Campion, Team Leader Data and GIS Information Services, Environment Canterbury.

the agreement is fulfilled, so the timeframe to make restoration is fairly short – usually six to nine months,” Aldridge says. Examples of restoration by offenders include a roading contractor who had mishandled contaminated soil running a training programme for others in the industry; donations to stream care groups and a school wetland planting project; a farmer giving presentations to Federated Farmers of New Zealand groups about his mistakes and remedies and how offences can be avoided; and for a water theft offence, putting ads in newspapers.

Aldridge says it’s a model that could be used by other councils and regulatory agencies in New Zealand but warns that it’s not an easy approach for a council to take. “It can be a scary process to run. We ran it hard because we had a belief in it. It required something of a culture change at Environment Canterbury; it was as difficult to get internal buy-in as external. It’s been a long journey, hard at times, but I think we are there. Winning this award has been a real boost.” In identifying a gap in its regulatory toolbox and design-

“It required something of a culture change at Environment Canterbury; it was as difficult to get internal buy-in as external.” Aldridge says they are starting to see the benefits of alternative environmental justice. “The outcomes are better for the environment, for the community involved and for the offender. It helps build good, ongoing relationships.” While there has been a reduction in fines and convictions, greater benefits are being delivered to the communities affected. It’s too early to measure any reduction in overall offences, but Aldridge believes increased awareness and understanding will contribute to a reduction in offences over time. Environment Canterbury has been surprised by the way in which offenders have responded so positively to the process, especially since it can be challenging. As well as participating in the conference, some offenders have been willing to teach others about the experience – reflecting the genuine engagement that has been achieved.

ing a process to fill that gap, Environment Canterbury has shown that responsibility for environmental management can successfully be shared between local authorities and their communities. It comes as the public sector, particularly local government, is seeking better outcomes for communities. “To implement such a process needs a certain philosophy and belief in that type of tool, taking a step away from the ‘tried and true’ methods. It is higher risk and you can be open to criticism. You must maintain your values and credibility, stick with your principles, and keep your eye on the outcome you want.”

Top left photo: The Alternative Environmental Justice programme may have positive effects for some of Canterbury’s ecosystems, including its braided rivers. Pictured is the Rakaia River. December 2014 Public Sector 23

POINT OF VIEW

Intergovernmental collaboration: Why central and local government need to work together for New Zealand to prosper By Lawrence Yule, President, Local Government New Zealand Government New Zealand’s objective to build a partnership with central government – a partnership based on recognition of the important role councils play in local and national development, as well as mutual respect for the quality of their performance in that role.

How does the relationship work?

The relationship with central government is fundamental to our current business plan and occurs on a number of levels. On one hand, we regularly meet with ministers and senior officials in a variety of contexts to discuss proposed policies and regulations, as well as to provide information on the views and opinions of our members. On the other hand, we are working with councils to lead the sector and show that local government is committed to lifting its value. One of our most important forms of engagement with central government is the Central Local Government Forum that occurs annually. Operating since 2000, the forum brings together relevant Cabinet ministers and LGNZ’s National Council for a half-day discussion on current and future issues of joint interest. The forum, which is jointly chaired by the prime minister and myself, as LGNZ’s president, provides an opportunity for frank discussion and a place to hammer out an

Managing natural hazard risk IN late October, LGNZ published Managing natural hazard risk in New Zealand – towards more resilient communities. The think piece discusses some of the key issues involved with determining risk and developing responses that are appropriate. www.lgnz.co.nz http://www.lgnz.co.nz/assets/Publications/Managing-naturalhazards-in-NZ-LGNZ-think-piece.pdf)

24 Public Sector December 2014

agreed plan of action. The forum sets the framework for dialogue in other parts of the government. We have regular meetings with the prime minister and the minister of local government and meetings with other ministers as issues arise. A much wider and more varied series of interactions occur at an operational level with regular contact between chief executives and senior officials of both sectors. A critical theme for local government in these discussions is our desire to ensure that any new legislation or regulation that impacts on local government should be subject to consultation with councils before consideration by Cabinet.

The next step

The next step for LGNZ is to move the relationship from an often ad hoc and reactive one to proactive and strategic. In our briefings to the prime minister and Government we have asked that a central and local government summit should be called together shortly after each parliamentary election to discuss and agree priorities for the coming parliamentary term. We see this as establishing a strategic vision for the nature of the relationship for that period. Councils lead local communities and economies and want the certainty of knowing what the Government’s

priorities are likely to be. Apart from anything else we need this information when setting our long-term plans. There are also advantages for the Government as many of the issues they are likely to progress for the good of the nation are likely to involve localities and local government. Where overlapping issues exist it is important that both spheres of government are aware of them and can contribute to how they might be resolved. Many countries around the world have incorporated the outcomes of these discussions into agreements or accords. In Australia, state governments now have signed memoranda of understanding with their respective local government associations setting out both the rules of engagement and agreed priorities, including how differences will be managed. LGNZ is keen to explore something similar for New Zealand – it would be the next step in strengthening our relationship with central government. In light of the Planning Council’s question, I would like to think that we have made good steps in shifting the relationship towards a partnership; however, we still have work to do.

Photo: New Zealand Transport Authority

n unitary states like New Zealand, central and local government are creatures of Parliament, one established to govern the nation, the other to govern our regions, cities and towns. Many responsibilities are quite unique to each sphere of government, for example, councils have little to say about foreign policy or defence commitments, while central government tends to stay out of decisions about the location of playgrounds. There are, however, an increasing number of issues of mutual interest and concern, for example, water quality, youth employment and our ageing demographics. Many of these challenges are what are known as wicked issues, that is, issues that cannot be addressed by a single agency working alone. Addressing them requires commitment from both spheres of government, although it is not a new challenge. Thirty years ago the New Zealand Planning Council published a research paper on the relationship between central and local government. Its title Paternalism or Partnership cleverly summarises the challenge local government systems all around the world face when seeking to build relationships with governments at the national or federal level. It also highlights Local

Make a date with IPANZ in IPANZ Annual Address Hon Bill English 19 February Wellington

The role and work of Superu

Families Commission CEO Clare Ward 4 March, Wellington

Demographic and economic change in NZ

NZIER’s Shamubeel Eaqub 24 February, Auckland 11 March, Wellington

Workshops and training courses on political processes Auckland network events Wellington seminars

IPANZ events are a great way to learn about emerging issues in the public sector, to develop professionally, and to network with colleagues. Many are free!

‘Meet the Chiefs’ New Professionals breakfasts