27 September 2011
Integrity Talking Points seeks to encourage conversations about trustworthiness and the spirit of service expected of everyone who works in New Zealand government agencies. " Integrity is a state of mind, it is not a set of rules." Beith Atkinson
27 September 2011
26 September 2011
A BBC interview on Friday with Alexander Lebedev gives new oxygen to consideration of the acceptability of UK tabloid journalists’ news gathering activities. A former KGB officer, who became a billionaire of course may not be the ideal source of ethical guidance…
The enthusiasm of British politicians to pursue malfeasance at the News of the World, equally enthusiastically supported by media owned by News International’s competitors, is at one level, admirable. All corrupt practices need to be investigated and the instigators exposed. Any involvement by officials is reprehensible. In the NOTW case, there is strong evidence that Metropolitan Police officers were paid for providing confidential information to reporters. This is a breach of trust which ultimately undermines public confidence on which good government depends. But what is the investigative function of the media when government agencies are inactive?
Lebedev – who owns the Independent and the London Evening Standard – was commenting on this function. He concluded that corruption by NOTW was of little significance. Any corruption in Britain is “beyond comparison” with the situation in his native Russia. Governments are not going to overcome serious corruption. “Nobody can do that but journalists”. He said that he had acquired newspapers to “take on” global corruption. Lebedev suggested that the NOTW activities had a place in the greater picture. He implied that intercepts of cell phones would not be considered unacceptable if they formed part of exposure by the media, and the undoing, of a corrupt official who had moved to Britain with ill gotten billions.
That may mean that the Independent and the Evening Standard are not constrained by their proprietor in the ways they seek out information that will establish and expose corruption. Lebedev appears sure that in some cases the end justifies the means.
The recent decision of the New Zealand Supreme Court in the Harmed case, regarding surveillance in the Urewera ranges seems to have a similar rationale. Do suspected paramilitaries, believed to be engaged in weapon training on private land, have rights to privacy? The Court decided that unlawfully obtained evidence is inadmissible except in the most serious of crimes. But how serious must the threat to public interest be, to justify State intrusion on the privacy rights of the individual? And despite the irony, do we condone unlawful activity in those circumstances by the police because of their statutory role to maintain the law, but not by the media because their is not a formal role?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/9598528.stm
www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10752214
22 September 2011
The Open Government Partnership was launched in New York on Tuesday by President Obama and numerous Heads of State and Heads of Government from the 46 participating countries. At the United Nations, this time last year, President Obama challenged the international community …”to come back this year with specific commitments to promote transparency, to fight corruption, to energize civic engagement and to leverage new technologies so we can strengthen the foundations of freedom in our own countries.”
The action plans include
Britain may well make aid dependent on beneficiary states committing to the OGP. The Minister of the Cabinet said that before UK gives budget support, countries will need to show they are working on plans to release government data,implement freedom of information laws and disclose details of how foreign aid is spent.
Membership of the OGP requires a commitment to the Open Government Declaration. This involves developing a national plan after public consultation and regular reporting on its implementation .
Despite the assurances of New Zealand ministers and their Australian counterparts about their enthusiasm for transparency and open government, neither New Zealand nor Australia has joined the OGP.
http://wiki.open.org.nz/Declaration_on_Open_and_Transparent_Government
www.opengovpartnership.org/countries
21 September 2011
The Office of Government Ethics is the United States agency responsible for setting and monitoring standards across the Federal civil service. It uses a tagline of “preventing conflicts of interest in the Executive Branch”. Its jurisdiction covers more than 4 million officials in 130 agencies. OGE has always had extensive and expansive material on its website, but last week refreshed the site, improving accessibility and encouraging greater reference to its guidance. Much of the material has direct relevance to New Zealand agencies seeking to promote integrity.
The refreshed website was launched in conjunction with the OGE biennial conference. In another move to promote access and the reuse of ethics resources, the OGE conference, attended by approximately 600 delegates, published proceedings on a dedicated conference website. There are almost 100 links from the site to presentations and relevant guidance, which in turn contain many more links to useful material. There are the inevitable You Tube clips of conference activities. The intention is that the conference website remains “live”.
The IEC Journal reports on the conference as having… “excellent overall organization, with many thoughtful touches to enhance the learning experience. OGE deserves credit for being willing to experiment with something as innovative as the smartphone app, though there were a few glitches. Some felt that the related website was a less than optimal solution for those without smartphones, while not everyone with a smartphone was enamoured with the app.”
“There are a lot of smart people throughout the government doing a lot of smart things. The conference provides a great start on improving efficiency through inter-agency sharing, but resource limitations and institutional constraints put a limit on what OGE can do. There is more that the IEC, and this website in particular could do to fill the gaps.”
http://ethicsconf18.crowdcompass.com/
20 September 2011
Fighting corruption attracts international media. This work of angels earns the endorsement of journalists everywhere. The reality of course is that rigorous and consistent efforts to combat corruption are flawed in all jurisdictions. A quintessential illustration is the commitment of China’s Government to protect intellectual property rights. Ministers make supportive comments but the commitment to relevant convention obligations is flawed.
(Declaring an interest: I was duped when buying a Kingston 64 mb memory stick in a Shanghai shop over the weekend. The stick was not merely a “knock-off” but was was not even capable of serving as a memory stick. Yet the vendor and all adjoining shops had boxes-full of this bogus stock.)
The Economist reports this week on the commitment of the club of the World’s rich states – the OECD – to fighting corruption. OECD members are bound by the Convention Against the Bribery of Foreign Officials. Unlike many international instruments – and UN conventions are among the worst – there is a compliance obligation. “Members must pass laws making it an offence for their citizens or firms to pay, to offer or to promise money or any other reward in exchange for favours from officials in other countries. And governments must be seen to enforce these laws; OECD bureaucrats and fellow members scrutinise each signatory to see how rigorously they investigate and punish foreign corrupt practices.”
The Economist comments that “the United States, which along with Germany is the keenest enforcer of the bribery accord, has had to undergo scrutiny at the hands of its peers and listen meekly to ideas for better enforcement. That contrasts sharply with the rejectionist American approach to many other forms of international legal scrutiny.”
Although New Zealand rates well in the Transparency International CPI, the World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators, the Ease of Doing Business Index and the Sustainable Governance Indicators, it is among the states with a minimal focus on enforcing the OECD Anti Corruption Convention obligations. It is one of the “usually virtuous” states that do little to meet obligations.
The APEC Anti Corruption working group in San Francisco last week had a focus on tools to strengthen public integrity. These include disclosure systems and processes for conducting investigations and prosecutions. Strengthening the APEC Conduct Principles for Public Officials, adopted by APEC when meeting in Australia in 2007, was identified as a way of combating corruption and illicit enrichment. But despite committing to the Conduct Principles, the extent of the New Zealand response is a report back on the APEC discussions. No agency “owns” the Conduct Principles or has responsibility for promoting compliance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_in_the_People’s_Republic_of_China
www.economist.com/node/21529020
www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/business/4519423/Corruption-rears-head-in-NZ-business
www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO1109/S00286/apec-anti-corruption-transparency-experts-working-group.htm
15 September 2011
This week’s anniversary of aerial combat in 1940 over London and southern England, marking what Churchill had termed as the Battle of Britain, provides an interesting coincidence for the declaration by the new Metropolitan Police Commissioner that his force will wage “total war” against crime, and that crime fighting will be a priority for the Met. Perhaps this reflects a refocus on the terms of the constable’s oath which is …”to cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property”. Is the police commitment to maintaining the peace during recent unrest now seen as improper?
The constable’s oath in England is interesting in that officers swear to serve “with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people”. A New Zealand constable commits to performing “to the best of my skill and knowledge”, while a Scottish constable’s oath is to “faithfully discharge” duties. An interesting conjecture is whether the different expressions involve a different obligation, or just that the Scots are less wordy?
A crime fight of a different kind featured in Chinese newspapers yesterday. Police have closed a network across 14 provinces that has been returning “swill oil” to the food chain. Swill oil, old cooking oil gathered from drains and intended for recycling as bio fuel, has been refined by a bioenergy company and sold back to restaurants. Apparently hard to distinguish from the original product, more than 100 tons, falsely rebanded, has been seized by police.
Chinese authorities are sensitive to the adulteration of food following widespread chemical “fixing” of pork meat and the melamine contamination of infant formula. A China Daily editorial has criticised the availability of swill oil calling for heavy penalties to prevent waste being reused as food. But it recognises as long as there is a market there will be an “incentive to sell the recycled swill to restaurants”.
www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/12/new-met-chief-hailed-by-may?intcmp=239
www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-09/14/content_13689138.htm
www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2011-09/06/content_13630859.htm
14 September 2011
Governments in the UK, Australia and New Zealand are not alone in proposing different accountability standards for teachers as a tool to support improved educational standards. The China Daily reported yesterday that there is a crisis of ethics in China’s education sector, indicating that the Ministry of Education will require teachers’ ethics to form part of performance evaluations, appointments, promotions and rewards.
“Teachers whose behaviours run counter to social customs or established norms should not be allowed to go unpunished. In other words professional ethics should be given priority above everything else and teachers found lacking in it should be disqualified.”
China has adopted a system of test scoring children structured around the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment. The programme was piloted in Shanghai. In a 2009 survey, Shanghai was the world leader in Maths (NZ was 13th), Sciences (NZ was 7th) and Reading (NZ was 7th). Shanghai processes, described by the OECD as “a pioneer of educational reform” , are being rolled out elsewhere in China.
The Chinese approach is that professional ethics are a primary requirement for a teacher’s qualification. This statement has some juxtaposition with the results of a Fudan University survey of teachers published before “Teachers’ Day” last week. A finding was that more than 94% of Shanghai’s teachers were feeling pressured by the test score process, heavy workloads, preparatory work and perfomance assessments that were closely linked to their pay.
Initial consideration which the New Zealand State Services Commissioner gave in 2010 to extending the State Services standards of integrity and conduct to teachers met with opposition from teaching unions. They saw integrity standards as a method of constraining the freedom of teachers to criticise government policy. The unions wanted teachers to be distinguished from other State servants covered by the code of conduct and the obligations of loyalty and fidelity to their employer of every other NZ employee (who is prevented by law from undermining their employer’s business).
Regardless of the Commissioner’s standards, teachers, as employees in the State sector, are required by the Cabinet Manual to be “fair, impartial, responsible and trustworthy”. Being impartial is the challenge. What are the political neutrality duties of teachers who are motivated to oppose education law and policy?
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2011-09/13/content_13670838.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment
http://www.ndu.org.nz/files/NDU-Express-Dec09-to-Feb10-web.pdf
13 September 2011
London’s new Metropolitan Police Commissioner was named yesterday. The appointment of Bernard Hogan-Howe will be made by the Queen on the joint recommendation of the Home Secretary and the Mayor of London. Although not regarded as the best candidate by two panels involved in the selection process, Hogan-Howe apparently had the confidence of the Government. He is the former Commissioner of Merseyside Police and has been an acting Deputy Commissioner at the Met since Sir Paul Stephenson resigned in July . His attractiveness for the appointment flows from policing successes in Merseyside, where in his five years as the force commander, crime fell by 29% and antisocial behaviour by 25%.
Knowledgeable commentators report that the current President of the Association of Police Officers is better qualified. However he recently irritated Ministers with public comments about the Government’s proposed police reforms and aggravated matters by debunking Ministerial criticism of the way police responded to rioting in a number of cities last month. There was no female candidate.
The Met has almost 50,000 sworn and civilian staff and more than 5,000 volunteer special constables, making it one of the largest police forces in the World. The Commissioner is paid the equivalent of NZ$400,000. The Commissioner of the New York Police Department, with approximately 43,000 staff, earns the equivalent of NZ$330,000. As an indication of how the job sizing of senior positions in New Zealand agencies has become misaligned with reality, the New Zealand Police Commissioner in 2009-2010 was reported in the State Services Commission annual report as receiving between $500,000 and $509,000. New Zealand Police has fewer than 11,599 employees.
http://www.ssc.govt.nz/sites/all/files/ar2010-remuneration-pages.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Police_Service
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Police
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Police_Department
12 September 2011
China’s Government has new measures to prevent corrupt officials leaving the country with stolen assets.
The Ministry of Supervision has introduced a programme in 10 regions including Shanghai and Guangdong that requires officials to report when they or their families intend overseas travel. Local governments are to closely monitor the transfer abroad by officials of any assets.
These anti corruption measures follow a central bank report in June 2011 indicating that thousands of officials had stolen more than $120 billion and that many had fled overseas since the mid-1990s. For example the deputy director of Guangdong’s anti-corruption office, is this week being investigated for fraud despite previous recognition as being one of China’s ten outstanding prosecutors, “a real hero who could bring down ‘tigers’ .”
The Minister of Railways was removed from his role earlier this year, accused of corruptly receiving more than $30m relating to the Shanghai – Beijing High Speed Rail project, and Shanghai’s Party Chairman has been sentenced to 18 years in another corruption scandal.
(Ironically, the Shanghai metro has an undeniable appearance of efficiency, evident during the numerous trips I have made on it over the last week. It moves unbelievable numbers across a very wide network, with trains not only running frequently, but on
time. )
The Ministry of Supervision as part of the State Council (an equivalent of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet in New Zealand), supervises the work of State agencies and investigates misconduct by people working in them.