NZ slips further on the Global Gender Gap index

29 October 2014

New Zealand’s gender gap has not improved since 2007 according to the  Global Gender Gap Report 2014, released yesterday by the World Economic Forum.

New Zealand is placed 15th from the 141 countries in this year’s survey.  It was 7th last year.  (Australia is ranked 24th.)  Of the four characteristics measured in the survey, New Zealand is among the ten highest ranking countries for Educational Attainment only.  It has been the top ranking country for Educational Attainment since 2007. Its ranking for Economic Participation, Health Survival and Political Empowerment continue to deteriorate year on year as more countries are included in the report.

Top Ten- Global Gender Gap Index 2014

Iceland  1
Finland  2
Norway  3
Sweden  4
Denmark  5
Nicaragua  6
Rwanda  7
Ireland  8
Philippines  9
Belgium 10

The World Economic Forum has found a strong correlation between a country’s gender gap and its national competitiveness. “As women account for one-half of a country’s potential talent base, a nation’s competitiveness in the long term depends significantly on whether and how it educates and utilises its women.”

The gender gap for economic participation and opportunity has only improved by 4% since the survey began nine years ago. The gap in 2006 of 56% has now narrowed to 60%.

Global Gender Gap Report 2014 – New Zealand ranking

  2006 2013 2014
Overall 9 7 15
Economic Participation 14 15 30
Education attainment 17 1 1
Health Survival 69 93 96
Political Empowerment 11 12 14
Participating countries 115 136 142

Today is the anniversary in 1938 when Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was elected as President of Liberia – Africa’s first female Head of State, and also of the foundation of the US National Organisation of Women.

www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2014

Uncategorized

,

October 29, 2014

Leave a comment

NZ recognises profit is without honour in another land – where bribes are involved

28 October 2014

Last week,  Transparency International  published its annual assessment of the extent to which the 41 OECD Member states have enforced the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions (OECD Anti Bribery Convention).  This year’s report has few differences from previous years.  The challenge is for States to take action against  companies based within their jurisdiction that make illegal payments to trade in other countries.  This is shown by nine of the Member States that are also part of the G20, which have been assessed as having taken “Little or No Enforcement”.  A few of the leading economic powers give some credibility to Anti Bribery Convention obligations through policing actions. Another group takes occasional action, while the  majority seem unaware of offending conduct that requires intervention.

The United States, United Kingdom, Germany and Switzerland have the approval of Transparency International again this year for their enforcement actions, and Canada has been recognised for a “significant improvement” in taking enforcement initiatives.  New Zealand was recognised for two investigations which moves it from the rump of 20 Member states that are classed as taking Little or No Enforcement, and now falls into the “Limited Enforcement” group.

The report acknowledges the need for political commitment where national economic interests can be seen to conflict with international anti-corruption commitments, and extensive resources are needed to investigate complex money laundering across borders. It is critical of the time most of the Member states are taking to develop a capacity to give effect to convention obligations – New Zealand, until this year, having been one of them.

There is criticism also that Member states ranked by Transparency International among those having the least corrupt public sectors are apparently uninterested in controlling the corrupting trade practices of national companies that perpetuate corruption in other jurisdictions.

Canada is the only country to show significant improvement since last year’s report, having significantly improved its foreign bribery law and started several investigations.

Nine of the 20 countries with the least public sector corruption are doing little or nothing to make sure their companies follow the same standards overseas, allowing them to contribute to public sector corruption elsewhere. The New Zealand Chapter of Transparency International has called on the New Zealand enforcement agencies “… to sustain their vigilance and take action to deter New Zealanders from paying bribes in any country…”

The Crown Law Annual Report tabled last week, like those of State Services Commission and the Office of the Auditor General continues the pattern of previous years by incorporating international surveys which enable the trustworthiness of New Zealand agencies to rated against comparable jurisdictions.  These include the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index,  the Bertelsmann Sustainable Governance Index, the Worldwide Governance Indicators, and the Corruption Perceptions Index.

 

www.transparency.org/news/pressrelease/transparency_international_calls_on_governments_to_crack_down_on_foreign_br

 

http://www.oecd.org/corruption/oecdantibriberyconvention.htm

 

http://issuu.com/transparencyinternational/docs/2014_exportingcorruption_oecdprogre?e=2496456/9826003

 

www.crownlaw.govt.nz/uploads/annualreport2014.pdf

 

https://integritytalkingpoints.com/2014/10/15/4356/

 

http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#home

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Justice_Project

Uncategorized

, ,

October 28, 2014

Leave a comment

Seeing a trusted public sector may depend on what you are looking at

23 October 2014

Progress towards a trusted State Services is summarised in pages 26-30 of the State Services Commission Annual Report tabled this week. The Commissioner identifies the tools which will help measure progress in the implementation of an Integrity Strategy for 2015 – 2020.  These include the favourable trend since 2007 in New Zealanders’ Experience and Perception of Trust in Public Services validated by the Kiwis Count survey results, the Transparency International National Integrity System Assessment (December 2013) and the Integrity and Conduct Survey of the State Services (December 2014).

The report acknowledges the need for a stronger focus to consistently entrench integrity aspirations.  A State Sector Leadership Strategy involving a group of agencies having “…. specific interests in promoting integrity” will use their specialist knowledge to develop new and innovative ways to reinforce standards.  Bullying is an undiminishing problem highlighted by the Integrity and Conduct survey results, and a “clear need” is seen for agencies to prevent bullying at work.

A strange disconnect continues throughout district health boards, where promotion and awareness of agency codes is  lower than elsewhere in the State services, yet DHB staff have the highest rates of personal accomplishment in their work. The report mentions the contribution of the Performance Improvement Framework and the Better Public Services Goals to the work of agency human resources units and the SSC Integrity Helpdesk in fostering better appreciation of integrity obligations.

The report points to the establishment of the Government Chief Privacy Officer and the related mandate for privacy leadership across the State services. Contrastingly, there is no reference to comparable statutory responsibilities, currently being championed by the Ombudsmen, to make official information available – although the inquiry into disclosure of Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade restructure information is mentioned.

The Auditor General’s Annual Report also tabled this week, has a number of similar measures that evaluate progress towards her Office’s paramount outcome, of a trusted public sector. She concluded that in 2013 / 14 the Office of the Auditor General mostly maintained or improved its outcomes. The State Services Commissioner’s observations were more equivocal.

www.ssc.govt.nz/sites/all/files/ssc-ar-2014.pdf

http://oag.govt.nz/2014/annual-report/part1.htm

Uncategorized

, , , ,

October 23, 2014

Leave a comment

Former Chinese officials living in Australia are reluctant to go back!

22 October 2014

Media yesterday carried an extraordinary report of Australia Federal Police acting with the cooperation and advice of Chinese officials to seize assets from migrant Chinese.  The AFP is pursuing hundreds of millions of dollars laundered in Australia by former Chinese officials.  The AFP will seek forfeiture orders for assets of people who entered as business migrants, many of whom are now Australian citizens. The Chinese have provided a priority list of suspects.

A common pattern is that spouses and children who move to Australia for education purposes, then provide a conduit for transferring funds.. The other  spouse continues working in China but is able to join their family should there be suspicions about their conduct.  The AFP has indicated that  “….as time goes on, they start to put  funds into legitimate assets such as houses, property, shares and bank accounts as the money becomes their wealth, but it’s never been their money to start with.”

President Xi Jinping has led an anticorruption drive to catch up with this expatriation of funds, estimated by the Washington-based Global Financial Integrity group, as about $US3 trillion over the period between 2005 and 2011.

Since taking power in November 2012, President Xi Jinping’s strategy seems to be to regain credibility by playing to the public, disillusioned with endemic graft in the Communist Party, and to intimidate his opponents.

Public servants now find it difficult to go abroad. Department heads now have few opportunities to travel as their passports are withheld.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry hopes to work with Australia “… to trace fugitives and retrieve embezzlement from overseas…The corrupt should find no safe haven in foreign countries..!”

An extradition treaty with China has yet to be finalised but as both are States Members of the UN Convention Against Corruption, Australia must consider any Convention related extradition request.  Migrants who haven’t yet gained Australian citizenship are able to apply for asylum to avoid being handed to Chinese authorities. There has been no public discussion yet about deprivation of citizenship on the basis of falsified applications.

www.smh.com.au/world/australia-set-to-seize-assets-of-corrupt-chinese-officials-20141020-118kl3.html#ixzz3GlmxphOi

Uncategorized

, , ,

October 22, 2014

Leave a comment

Moves to keep politicians’ wings clipped

21 October 2014

Today the Recall of MPs Bill will be debated in the House of Commons. The Bill reflects a general dissatisfaction with the ability to get rid of MPs who lose the trust of their electorates. The purpose is to enable constituents to petition for the removal of an MP who has received a prison sentence or who has been found by the House to have committed “serious wrongdoing”.

Critics believe the effect will be quite different because the requirement for the agreement of the House means that MPs may be reluctant to hold their colleagues to account. It isn’t just a case of a constituency having a recall referendum if enough people sign a petition.

Fewer than 25% of respondents to a recent YouGov survey indicated that they trusted their MP (a similar satisfaction rating to UMR survey results in New Zealand). This suggests that there is a general frustration with politicians and arguably a need for voters to be able to petition for a recall when there is a substantial loss of confidence. Politicians have a different perspective about themselves. In another survey 86% of British MPs showed that they believe that they are trusted by their constituents.

A reaction to the self-interest of Members of the European Parliament led to the launch last week of the EU Integrity Watch database (www.integritywatch.eu) which will publish information about the interests and incomes of MEPs. Data is now available showing that there are 175 MEPs earning at least 500 euros per month from outside activities on top of annual salaries that exceed 120,000 euros.

Transparency International has commented that as more than half of MEPs have business interests outside of the European Parliament, it is important that voters know exactly what those private interests are. “To restore trust in Brussels, the Parliament must impose meaningful checks and balances.”

The database will identify differences between countries, political groups and national parties, and enable monitoring of conflicts between the private commitments of MEPs and their public duties. It allows MEPs to be ranked by the number of outside interests and the (declared) income derived from these activities.

These conflicts are no longer to be given a blind eye. This victory in sinking European aspirations is perhaps fitting on the anniversary today of the Battle of Trafalgar!

 

www.sundaypost.com/news-views/politics/24-of-people-trust-mps-says-poll-1.637027

www.transparencyinternational.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/EU-Integrity-Watch-Launch-Press-Release.pdf

www.integritywatch.eu

Uncategorized

October 21, 2014

Leave a comment

Can treating UN delegates ever be justifiable?

20 September 2014

Campaigning for a temporary seat on the United Nations Security Council seems to involve practices which may well be unlawful in domestic politics and breach conduct standards expected of officials.   After ten years of soliciting votes, the New Zealand campaign concluded successfully last week. New Zealand sought to ensure its campaign message was memorable not only through diplomatic endeavour and Ministerial visits, but also with aid projects, hosting UN Ambassadors on visits to New Zealand and providing gifts for UN delegation staff.

All contenders engage in what is classed as “treating” in the election law of most jurisdictions. The extent of these activities and the value of the benefits provided seem to be the only distinguishing factor. The relevant provision in the New Zealand Electoral Act is s 217  – “Every person commits the offence of treating who corruptly, …directly or indirectly gives or provides …. any food, drink, entertainment, or provision to or for any person… (b) for the purpose of procuring himself … to be elected….”

The Principles of Integrity and Transparency in Lobbying, formally adopted by all OECD Member States in 2010 prohibit lobbyists giving gifts to politicians and officials. These principles would appear not to have application at the United Nations.

Buzzfeed has published photographs of election gifts provided to UN delegation staff. The New Zealand “goodies bag” is larger than the packages provided by Spain, and Turkey.  Turkey’s gift was Turkish delight and a thermos, Spain gave a leather business card holder and confectionery, New Zealand gave licorice and the New Zealand produced UN Handbook  (now in its 51st edition) – and to African delegations, a copy of the African Union Handbank (in a format similar to the UN Handbook) which has recently been published, with New Zealand support  and funding.

Providing the Handbook is in line with the Auditor General’s guidance on Gifts and Hospitality set out in the Controlling Sensitive Expenditure Guidelines where the concern is that gift giving may involve an inappropriate or excessive value and risk an explicit or implicit expectation of a favour in return. OAG guidance indicates that officials should only accept “…infrequent and inexpensive gifts …for example, pens, badges, and calendars…”  Interestingly the Auditor General’s last declaration of Gifts and Hospitality records that the only gifts she gave during the preceding six months were 15 tie pins,  21 badges and 8 coasters!

Unlike the NZ Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade celebrations on Friday marking the successful vote, last year when Saudi Arabia was elected to a  temporary seat on the Security Council, it declined to take it up, and a “thank you but we don’t want to” gift was distributed to staff of national delegations to the United Nations.

www.buzzfeed.com/hayesbrown/election-gifts-security-council?utm_term=fuyj9j#26zl9g7

www.mfat.govt.nz/UNHB2013/index.php

www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/MFA%20AU%20Handbook%20-%20Text%20v10b%20interactive.pdf

www.oag.govt.nz/2007/sensitive-expenditure

www.oecd.org/corruption/ethics/oecdprinciplesfortransparencyandintegrityinlobbying.htm

Uncategorized

, ,

October 20, 2014

Leave a comment

Would South Canterbury Finance have been a better target for IRD than the SFO?

17 March 2014

The South Canterbury Finance proceedings have led to criticism of the Serious Fraud Office, less for the decision to prosecute four company officers and their lawyer – and more for the conduct of the criminal investigation, the case presentation during the five month trial – and the outcome. The cases against two officers were withdrawn before the trial, there were not guilty findings in respect of the other two, and even the convicted lawyer was acquitted on the more serious of the charges brought against him.

This is a poor return on what the SFO has called the most resource-intensive and time-consuming investigation in recent history. The cost to the Crown may exceed $1.6 million.  Although the SFO Director considers that the case was investigated thoroughly and presented to the court as best as possible, a former head of investigations claims that case preparation was inadequate,

The backlash may well be a reconsideration of how best to manage the investigation and prosecution of major corruption cases. Just as a number of parties have their knives out for the UK SFO, so a move may grow here to revisit structural arrangements confirmed soon after the Key Government was formed in 2008.

Problems with SFO effectiveness in the UK have resulted in proposals for it to be dismantled. Similar moves to improve the policing of bribery and corruption were dropped several years ago.  The SFO position was not helped when the Director incurred media disapproval recently by commenting that “ the SFO does not do lectures on ethics.  We do not issue guidance on how not to rob banks. I would not dream of telling you how I think you should behave. It is for business and senior managers to decide appropriate standards of ethics and integrity in their commercial activities….”

While the Home Secretary’s preference is to give responsibility for economic crime to the National Crime Agency – under her direct control – the Attorney General supports the status quo although agreeing that some reforms should be considered.  The National Crime Agency, set up a year ago, has wider access to intelligence sources than the SFO and the power to direct police forces across Britain in tackling drugs, corruption, cybercrime and child sex abuse. The momentum seems to be for the SFO jurisdiction to be blended in also.

Coincidentally, today is the anniversary of the imprisonment in 1931 of Al Capone. He was convicted and sentenced to 11 years for tax evasion.

www.lawfuel.co.nz/news/1602/south-canterbury-finance-verdicts-guilty-lawyer-not-guilty-directors

www.goodcorporation.com/business-ethics-debates/prosecution-and-enforcement-of-the-uk-bribery-act/

www.history.com/this-day-in-history/capone-goes-to-prison

Uncategorized

, , ,

October 17, 2014

Leave a comment

New Zealand compares well on Sustainable Governance Indicators

15 October 2014   

The Sustainable Governance Indicators released by Bertelsmann Stiftung in July seem to have had negligible media coverage. The interpretation of the New Zealand indicator scores was probably seen as a mixed bag by all parties and therefore not given airtime during the election period.  However all the New Zealand indicators improved when compared with the 2013 Index.

The SGI is a cross-national survey providing comparative assessments of OECD and EU member states.  The purpose is to identify and foster effective policymaking and explore how governments target sustainable development.  The sustainable governance that it advocates is built on three pillars: Policy Performance, Democracy and Governance.  The Index is a compilation of the indicator scores given to each country’s policies and practices.

New Zealand scores in the upper half on most indicators. This is attributed to a unicameral parliament, a strong executive, and a commitment to applying new public management principles and methods to enhance strategic capabilities and performance.

The assessors however see New Zealand as needing greater innovation, a capital gains tax, more regional development and an extension of the parliamentary term to four years.

 

Sustainable Governance Indicators 2014             New Zealand ranking

 

Are Democratic Institutions and Practices robust?

 from 41 States
Civil Rights and Political Liberties 1st
Rule of Law 3rd
Electoral Process 9th
Access to Information 15th
 

Does Government cultivate social and economic conditions that generate wellbeing and empowerment
Social Policies 1st
Economic Policies 16th
Environmental Policies 27th
 

Do institutional arrangements enhance the public sector’s capacity to act? Can citizens, NGOs and other organizations hold the government accountable for its actions?
Executive Capacity 4th
Executive Accountability 12th

www.sgi-network.org/2014/New_Zealand/Key_Findings

www.sgi-network.org/2014/New_Zealand

www.sgi-network.org/2014/Democracy/Quality_of_Democracy

www.sgi-network.org/2014/New_Zealand/Economic_Policies

www.sgi-network.org/2014/New_Zealand/Executive_Capacity

Uncategorized

October 15, 2014

Leave a comment

What’s the integrity connection to the anniversaries of the Battle of Hastings and the Nobel Peace Prize for Martin Luther King?

14 October 2014

Integrity is the inclusive and all-embracing description of the ethical obligations of public servants.  That integrity engenders  strong public trust in New Zealand Government agencies and the people who work in them. Occasional incidents arise which suggest a disregard for the Fairness, Impartiality, Responsibility and Trustworthiness standards set out in the State Services Commissioner’s code of conduct, but responses to the State Services Integrity Survey last year indicated that 82% of agency staff considered their colleagues to be honest and trustworthy.

This of course is far from a universal perception of governments and their staff.  Many states professing a commitment to fighting corruption appear to have insurmountable implementation problems. The Conference of the Members of the UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime (UNDOC) last week in Vienna is illustrative. Participants like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Myanmar and Syria are most unlikely to have administrations which have any capacity to give effect to Conference resolutions.

But illustrations of corrupt practices are not too far away.  Yesterday, the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption reported on its investigation into six former RailCorp managers, including the general manager for maintenance contracts  (and his sister working at Housing NSW) who used their positions to obtain substantial personal benefits from government contractors. The Commission found that they accepted payments which they knew would tend to influence the exercise of their official functions, and has recommended that the Director of Public Prosecutions take action.

Meanwhile at the Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington it appears that staff laptops enable access to sensitive agency information, including the inventory database, and recently up to 202 laptops have gone missing!

There is a vague integrity thread connecting these matters with the anniversary today of the Battle of Hastings when William of Normandy defeated the English King Harold II  – and of the nomination of Dr Martin Luther King Jr as the Nobel Peace Prize winner for 1964.

www.ssc.govt.nz/integrity-and-conduct-survey-2013-report

www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CTOC/CTOC-COP-session7.html

www.icac.nsw.gov.au/investigations/past-investigations/article/4686

Uncategorized

October 14, 2014

Leave a comment

Moonlighting valued at the top of the UK Civil Service?

13 October 2014

The State Services code of conduct includes a standard obliging people working in agencies to “…avoid any activities , work or non-work, that may harm the reputation of our organisation or of the State Services…”   SSC guidance on the meaning of the standard refers to potential conflicts that arise from secondary employment or from other business interests. “…We must have clear authorisation from our organisation before we begin any secondary or additional work.  Additional employment may create a conflict if it involves:

  • work in a business that has or is developing a contractual relationship with any government organisation
  • an organisation that receives public funding
  • a business that lobbies Ministers, or Members of Parliament, or government organisations
  • a business that is regulated by the organisation we work for
  • demands that may undermine our ability to fulfil our duties
  • a business that has an interest in the privileged, private or confidential information that we can access….”

Potential conflicts like these are such that it would be unusual for a New Zealand departmental Chief Executive to hold a concurrent role as a director or employee of a large public company.

The UK Civil Service code has no direct equivalent provision. And that may be why the announcement of the appointment of the Chief Executive of the Civil Service – who takes up this newly created position today – referred to the three secondary employment roles he has maintained throughout the eight months since he joined the Civil Service.  These are as a non executive director of an international brewery company, the chairman of an energy exploration company and an adviser to another energy company.

He will continue as a director (remuneration £100,000)  with the brewer, SABMiller (the name is derived from South African Brewery, its origin, and Millers, the largest of its beer brands in the United States). It operates in 80 countries.

Public concern is reflected in support for an Opposition MP’s criticism that “…We should never have big business people running the Civil Service. We want them on advising committees and we want their expertise available as much as possible, but not running the Civil Service – it compromises neutrality…”

The Cabinet Office is said to be satisfied there is no conflict of interest. More than 230 remarks about an article in the Guardian suggest that many others have a different perspective.

http://www.ssc.govt.nz/node/1914

http://civilservicecommission.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Civil%20Service%20Code.pdf

www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/civil-service-boss-john-manzoni-sabmiller-director

Uncategorized

, , ,

October 13, 2014

Leave a comment

« Older posts
Newer posts «