Disclosure of chief executives’ gifts, hospitality and expenses

25 January 2013

The State Services Commission posted its expectations yesterday about the publication by agency chief executives of gifts and hospitality given and received, and their expenses, for the second half of 2012. This is the fifth half yearly return that the Commissioner has required of State Services chief executives.

The disclosure of expenses is a continuing demonstration of the benefits of openness. Returns were newsworthy when they were novel. As the cycle of disclosure has become routine, the media has lost interest. In 2010 when the State Services Commissioner first set requirements for transparency by chief executives, many queried the purpose and benefit which would flow from the information being made public. The reluctance to disclose of some had the perverse effect of attracting attention. That opposition seemed irrational when European and North American jurisdictions akin to New Zealand placed greater demands on their officials.

Material accessible on http://www.data.govt.nz now affords transparency. Anyone wanting to know about this type of public spending is entitled to access it. Openness may also be a constraint on any indiscipline. Norms across the State Services become apparent, and agency staff can see what their chief executive considers to be good practice.
Each agency is required to post its chief executive’s expenses by 8 February 2013. Those for the Bay of Plenty DHB and Whanganui DHB are already available. This reflects an interesting trait. The Bay of Plenty DHB for example, was an enthusiastic and “early adopter” of the Standards of Integrity and Conduct for the State Services , evident also in the DHB’s participation in a training DVD issued by the State Services Commission in 2008. The chief executive seems to be a leader also in meeting the expectations of the State Services Commissioner “… to enhance public trust through the open disclosure of expenditure in which there is a public interest…”

www.ssc.govt.nz/ce-expenses-disclosure

www.ssc.govt.nz/sites/all/files/disclosure-ce-expenses-nov2010.pdf

http://data.govt.nz/

Uncategorized

, ,

January 25, 2013

Leave a comment

New Zealand tops Open Budget Survey

24 January 2013

The 2012 Open Budget Survey results were published yesterday. New Zealand is the highest scoring country of the 100 countries assessed on the Open Budget Index. It rates as the Most Transparent Government in providing key budget documents. This is the fourth survey conducted by the International Budget Partnership since 2006. In the last survey New Zealand was the runner up to South Africa.

The survey is claimed to be the only independent comparison of budget transparency and accountability using experts outside government. It shows that in 77 of the 100 countries assessed – covering half the world’s population – budget transparency is largely absent.

Russia is an interesting addition to the “top ten” in the latest results moving from 21st in 2010.

Australia is not included in the countries assessed.

Open Budget Index 2012 (2010)
New Zealand 1 ( 2 )
South Africa 2 ( 1 )
United Kingdom 3 ( 3 )
Sweden 4 ( 6 )
Norway 5 ( 5 )
France 6 ( 4 )
United States 7 ( 7 )
South Korea 8 ( 10 )
Czech Republic 9 ( 18 )
Russia 10 ( 21 )

http://internationalbudget.org/what-we-do/open-budget-survey/

www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8214202/NZ-government-transparency-tops-world

Uncategorized

, ,

January 24, 2013

Leave a comment

State Services Commissioner sees future for best and brightest public servants

23 January 2013

The Guardian Public Leaders network has carried the State Services Commissioner’s views on what will be achieved by the proposed State Sector Amendment Act which had its Introduction in December. Last week a video of the Commissioner’s comments indicated a focus on creating a “compelling” image, a public service brand based on the stewardship by chief executives for the “best and brightest”, offering exciting possibilities for new entrants. He spoke of offering a “portfolio of experiences”. That reflects a provision in the Bill for “key positions” in Public Service departments and departmental agencies, designated because of their potential to develop senior leaders or because they are critical to the Public Service, to which appointments can only be made with the agreement of the Commissioner.

Ironically the next day the Guardian network published a critical assessment of recent experiences of “parachuting” UK public sector managers into New Zealand. The New Zealand contributor implied that the experience portfolio of two chief executives selected by the State Services Commissioner, who have prematurely returned to Britain, were insufficient to cope with the way in which the administrations differ.

New Zealand featured again yesterday in the Guardian network when the Commissioner’s comments were reprised in a column format under the byline of the network content coordinator.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/public-leaders-network/2013/jan/22/new-zealand-civil-service-improvement-iain-rennie

http://www.guardian.co.uk/public-leaders-network/video/2013/jan/14/global-public-leaders-iain-rennie-video

http://www.guardian.co.uk/public-leaders-network/2013/jan/15/uk-public-managers-new-zealand

Uncategorized

, ,

January 23, 2013

Leave a comment

New Zealand seen as free and reputable

22 January 2013

The beauty contests among states have begun for the year.

Last week Freedom House published its Freedom in the World: 2013. This is the seventh year of the report. Countries are assessed to determine whether they are “free” rather than focusing on a pecking order. There are 195 nation states measured on the Freedom House index which considers levels of political rights and civil liberties. There are three more “free” countries this year than last year ( now 90 ) with 16 others showing notable gains, but 27 countries were found to be losing freedoms.

In the Pacific a notable gain was Tonga, which was assessed as having moved from partially free to being free. While Egypt, Libya and Côte d’Ivoire rose from Not Free to Partly Free, Mali with evident troubles at present fell two tiers, from Free to Not Free. Iran remains among the least free states.

And yesterday the Reputation Institute published its annual survey, this year involving 36,000 consumers in G8 countries, rating the reputation of 50 countries worldwide. The survey analyses these countries under 16 characteristics in three categories: advanced economy, appealing environment and effective government.

As in 2012, Canada is the most respected country with respondents rating it highly as a place to visit and to live, work and to study.
Australia took second place this year from Sweden, which is now third.

The “top ten” countries with the best reputation in 2013
1. Canada
2. Australia
3. Sweden
4. Switzerland
5. Norway
6. New Zealand
7. Finland
8. Denmark
9. Austria
10. Netherlands
.
Canada and New Zealand are the only non-European countries in the top 10.
Japan, ranked 12, is the most reputable Asian country.

Reputation Institution also explored which countries ”love themselves the most” – the self image score. New Zealanders and Australians have a higher self image than the perception held of them by other nationalities.

Top ten countries in self-perception in 2013
1. Australia
2. Norway
3. Denmark
4. New Zealand
5. Canada
6. Finland
7. Switzerland
8. Sweden
9. Indonesia
10. Singapore

www.freedomhouse.org/article/freedom-world-2013-middle-east-gains-provoke-intensified-repression)

http://travel.cnn.com/explorations/life/which-country-has-best-reputation-488471

.

Uncategorized

, ,

January 21, 2013

Leave a comment

Are frustrations boiling over in relationships between UK civil service and Ministers?

16 January 2013

The attitudes of Ministers and senior civil servants were explored yesterday at the second meeting of the House of Commons Public Administrations Committee on the future of the civil service. Four expert witnesses were examined on the increasingly public collapse in the mutually supportive role of Minister and departmental heads. The breakdown in relationships is illustrated by major articles in the Times, Independent, Telegraph and the Guardian yesterday and today, with headlines like “No, Minister: Whitehall in ‘worst’ crisis”, “Ministers attack civil servants to deflect blame from Coalition”, and “Yes Minister is essential training for Government”.

The witnesses were forthright in their comments, including observations about leadership, the churn in senior officials, the numerous years needed for Departmental heads to become competent in their tasks and for culture change to be achieved within agencies, the poor skills of Ministers, the confusing processes of appointing departmental heads, the doubtful contribution of executive boards, and the inadequacy of accountability arrangements.

Governance in the UK public sector is not in a happy place if the evidence given to the Committee is accurate. The 90 minute video record of the Committee is an eye-opener from a New Zealand public servant’s perspective.

www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=12269

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ministers-attack-civil-servants-to-deflect-blame-from-coalition-8451630.html

www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3657646.ece

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9802332/Yes-Minister-is-essential-training-for-Government.html

Uncategorized

, ,

January 17, 2013

Leave a comment

Was 2012 the year of the whistleblower?

14 January 2013

The Economist predicted that 2012 would be the year of the whistleblower. That may have been the case in the United States as illustrated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the IRS with high profile cases rewarding informants with a percentage of penalties imposed – but there was less of a groundswell elsewhere.  

In the Britain, it was December before Whistleblowers UK, a support groups for potential whistleblowers, was established to complement the activities of Public Concern at Work.  The Leveson inquiry and related Police investigations suggest that the media remains the preferred vehicle for disclosing matters going seriously off the rails in organisations.  A justification claimed by a Metropolitan Police chief inspector when convicted last week of “leaking” details of a police operation to a newspaper perhaps typifies this attitude.  DCI April Casburn is reported to have claimed that “…it’s not uncommon for a lot of people to use the press, for politicians to get a story out, to have something released or a wrongdoing to be exposed. I think in some circumstances it’s right to go to the press because they do expose wrongdoing and they do expose poor decisions….”

 In Australia there have been legislative amendments during the year to whistleblowing provisions in several states. Whistleblowing made the news in the trial of senior Reserve Bank employees involved in making corrupt payments over a number of years to win banknote production contracts. The whistleblower told the Court that his repeated reports were ignored as a “conspiracy” against senior managers.  Corruption involving  Securency (half owned by the Australian Government) appears to have spread beyond South East Asian countries with the arrest yesterday of the former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria for bribes received in return for commissioning banknote manufacturing from Securency.

“Whistleblower Tour” is the description of material posted on the State Services Commission website, relating to a presentation by Professor A J Brown, of Griffiths University, Queensland, when visiting Wellington in November 2012.  The material is primarily about the Australian public sector experience – in Federal and State Governments –  and incorporates findings from the extensive research published under the tag of “Whistling while they Work”.

The whistleblowing tour, having an Australian focus, does not seem to have been used as a vehicle for reinforcing the obligations on all who work in the New Zealand public sector to follow processes set out in their agency protected disclosure policy should they encounter any serious wrongdoing at work. The Protected Disclosures Act requires agencies to periodically republish their policies so that staff have a familiarity with that policy. In 2011 a survey by the Auditor General found that awareness of protected disclosure policies was variable – averaging 71.2% across all of government.

In October 2012 the Ombudsmen’s Office issued revised guidance on Blowing the whistle – making a protected disclosure.

www.economist.com/node/21563744

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/01/08/phone-hacking-april-casburn-news-of-the-world_n_2432182.html?ref=topbar

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-2097621

www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-14/whistleblower-outlines-bribery-allegations-in-securency-case/4262502

http://afriquejet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4634:nigeria-former-central-bank-governor-arrested-over-corruption-allegation&catid=2:news&Itemid=111

www.ssc.govt.nz/whistleblower-tour

www.oag.govt.nz/2011/public-sector-fraud/fraud-awareness-survey/fraud-detection/question-18.htm

www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/resources-and-publications/documents/making-a-protected-disclosure-blowing-the-whistle

https://integritytalkingpoints.com/2012/11/27/kiwis-not-interested-in-whistleblowing/#comments

http://corruptioncrimecompliance.com/2013/01/the-person-of-the-year-the-whistleblower/

http://nydailyrecord.com/blog/2012/11/26/commentary-2013-another-year-of-the-whistleblower/

Uncategorized

, ,

January 14, 2013

Leave a comment

Pursuit of lost greatness by public services a world apart

21 December 2012

In August the Head of the State Services wrote about changing the culture of the New Zealand State Services as part of Better Public Services in a way that will “… make us great…”  Yesterday the Head of the UK Civil Service took a similar aspirational position relating to the delivery of essential public services  and “…getting Britain back on the rise…” a variant on putting the great back into Britain.

The comment promoted awareness of the publication today of the personal objectives of departmental heads. This forms part of the Cabinet Office Minister’s drive for greater accountability by the UK civil service and increased transparency in government. The aim is that the public can assess whether there is value for money in the Government’s objectives.

The intention is to clarify the relationship in the UK between Ministers and their departmental Heads and highlight where the responsibilities lie. The Minister believes this will “…ensure stronger joint leadership for departments, leading to smoother implementation of government policy and a better deal for the public… Objectives approved by the Ministers in each Department, will then be signed off by the Prime Minister.”

Publishing these objectives is seen as further step to opening up government and reforming the civil service. The Minister wants “…an exceptional civil service delivering the best for Britain…”

http://igps.victoria.ac.nz/publications/files/c87c78c0cc3.pdf

www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/news/reforms-increase-accountability-very-top-civil-service

www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/permanent-secretaries-objectives-published-first-time

www.guardian.co.uk/public-leaders-network/2012/dec/20/francis-maude-bob-kerslake-permanent-secretary

Uncategorized

, , ,

December 21, 2012

Leave a comment

Joining the Open Government Partnership not a NZ priority

19 December 2012

Open and Shut, an Australia Freedom of Information blog, is keeping an eye on whether the New Zealand Government is showing any greater enthusiasm than Australia for the Open Government Declaration and whether there has been progress in becoming party to the Open Government Partnership.

The latest blog post picks up the response from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to an information request.  The Ministry  advised today that “…to  date no decision has been made on participation in the Open Government Partnership…”  It includes the reference to a Ministry document from mid 2012 which indicates that joining the international movement is a low priority.

The reality is that New Zealand has as great a commitment to open government as most of the OGP member states.  It  just seems less certain that the theatre associated with international conferences is the appropriate way to promote change.  The State Servces Commissioner’s statement in mid October that “The use of technology to further improve access to public services is essential but this needs to be delivered while ensuring personal information is protected,” may also reflect a slowing of that commitment.

http://foi-privacy.blogspot.co.nz/2012/12/nz-sits-on-ogp-as-low-priority-while.html#.UNGIYW-kpz8

http://fyi.org.nz/request/676/response/3473/attach/4/Open%20Government%20Partnership%20OIA.pdf

www.ssc.govt.nz/head-state-services-tasks-gcio-privacy-review

https://integritytalkingpoints.com/2012/07/20/is-the-open-government-partnership-relevant-to-new-zealand/

www.guardian.co.uk/public-leaders-network/2012/aug/20/big-debate-open-data

Uncategorized

, , ,

December 19, 2012

Leave a comment

What makes civil servants happy in their work?

18 December 2012

In the United States, 687,000 federal civil servants from 362 agencies responded  to this year’s satisfaction survey. The results suggest that 80% like the work they do, with nearly as many saying their agencies achieved what they were meant to. Two thirds would recommend their agency as a good place to work.  68% said that, overall, they were satisfied with their job.

Unsurprisingly the two year pay freeze in the US civil service has contributed to pay dissatisfaction – fewer than 59% are satisfied with their salary, 48% said they received recognition for doing a good job, and only 40% felt innovation and creativity were rewarded.  43% (an increase of 2% in the year) said that no action was taken with poor performers who cannot or will not improve.

These averaged statistics hide wide disparities between agencies according to the Federal Government Best Places to Work survey.

NASA, intelligence agencies and the State Department  scored highest among large agencies – with more than 15,000 employees.  The lowest rated agencies overall were the Office of the US Trade Representative (small),  the Broadcasting Board (medium) and the Homeland Security Department (large).

“The common element for the agencies that are doing well is really good leadership …(with)  individual leaders that prioritise making their organization run better and focusing on talent to make that happen…” 

“Every agency has the ability to be NASA.”

The Australian State of the State report published earlier this month indicates that Australian public service satisfaction levels are lower than in the US. However, unlike the US, Australian engagement levels have remained stable over the last two years – with new entrants and senior officials having the highest and slightly improving engagement levels.  They are higher than the United Kingdom, although the UK statistics gathered in the Civil Service People Survey are from 2011 so may not be a direct comparison.

The only related New Zealand statistics are agency specific.

The overall engagement levels are’

US Federal Civil Service 68%
Australian Public Service 61%
British Civil Service 56%
   

As with the US survey, the Australian report confirms that leadership remains an essential factor in maintaining high employee engagement.  “Leaders who are visible to their employees have an especially powerful effect”.    When asked whether they thought senior leaders in their organisation were sufficiently visible, employees who strongly agreed they were, showed substantially higher scores (double in some cases) on all components of employee engagement.

www.govexec.com/management/2012/11/employee-morale-dips-commitment-mission-holds-steady/59708/

www.govexec.com/management/2012/12/employee-satisfaction-dips-record-margin-pay-taking-biggest-plunge/60133/?oref=skybox

www.apsc.gov.au/about-the-apsc/parliamentary/state-of-the-service/new-sosr/04-employee-engagement

Uncategorized

, , ,

December 18, 2012

Leave a comment

Trust and trustworthiness – not a matter of give and take

17 December 2012

 

Baroness O’Neill when in New Zealand two years ago gave the Royal Society Aronui addresses about trust. ‘A question of trust’ was her topic when she delivered the Reith Lectures in 2002. She gave a BBC talk last weekend on ‘Trustworthiness before Trust’ in which she explored the difference between trust and trustworthiness.  Trust of course is something that people extend to others. Those who are trustworthy earn that trust.

Everyone likes to think of themselves as trustworthy.  Baroness O’Neill addressed the question of ‘How can we make it easier to judge trustworthiness?’.  She believes that this is a matter of personal judgement.  We develop trust in people after assessing their competence, honesty and reliability. We may trust people to do some things but not trust them to do something else.

Most of us see through organisational claims to trustworthiness and transparency.  That is why it is the commitment of individuals to values that is always important. Organisational spin is readily forgotten. Where the conduct of senior managers lacks integrity, trust in their organisation will be diminished. Officials who do what they say they will do, and are honest about what they cannot do, will be seen as trustworthy and gain trust.

The State Services Commission promotes the ‘6 trust elements’ as a tool for maintaining trustworthiness. The extent to which these 6 trust elements have been implemented by agencies was assessed in 2007 and in 2010 by the State Services integrity survey. The 6 trust elements are that

  • Agencies have integrity standards
  • Agencies promote those standards –‘talking the talk’
  • The integrity standards are integrated into the agencies operations – ‘the way we do things around here’
  • Managers model the standards –‘walking the talk’
  • Consequences for breaching the standards are known by agency staff
  • Agencies act decisively when breaches occur.

 

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20627410

www.ssc.govt.nz/node/5390

Uncategorized

December 17, 2012

Leave a comment

« Older posts
Newer posts «