Is Canada’s integrity legislation inadequate?

18 December 2010

Yesterday was the 4th anniversary of the passing of Canada’s Federal Accountability Act.  This legislation was intended to give effect to many of the recommendations of a Royal Commission enquiring into allegations of widespread government corruption. Following a change of government, priority was given to establishing comprehensive remedial structures. The Act set up a series of agencies to monitor the integrity of Ministers and their officials.

Four years on, an NGO is very critical about the effectiveness of the legislation. Democracy Watch claims  some provisions have not been put into operation and further changes are needed to plug dozens of loopholes.  An implication is that the current government is replicating the poor practices of its predecessor.

A Democracy Watch report card itemises the improvements needed for “honest, ethical, open, representative and waste preventing government…”

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsDec1710.html

http://canadaonline.about.com/od/bills/p/accountability.htm

Does SSC have a role to play in investigating fraud?

17 December 2010

An article in the Washington Times, proposing that Inspectors General in US government agencies be given subpoena powers to gather evidence of misconduct, is a reminder of the extensive powers which the State Services Commissioner has to investigate integrity breaches in the New Zealand State Services, and particularly, in the Public Service.

The article suggests that more effective enforcement could be achieved in cases of fraud, waste and abuse if Inspectors General could compel witnesses to provide statements.

Unsung, and not used to date in code of conduct matters, the State Services Commission has this capability in the case of State Services agencies.  These powers facilitate  inquiries into incidents  (commonly responding to a statutory direction by the Prime Minister) and are equally available when investigating misconduct or potential breaches of the State services code of conduct.

However the outcome of using subpoena type powers would be quite different in New Zealand.  An Inspector General gathers evidence which would usually be used in a Department of Justice prosecution.  By contrast, if evidence of criminal activity is uncovered in an investigation by the State Services Commissioner, the matter would be referred to the police for further inquiry.

The NZ Auditor General expects that where any State sector agency suspects internal fraud, the matter is to be referred to the appropriate law enforcement authority – in practice, the Police or the Serious Fraud Office. The broad powers of the State Services Commissioner perhaps mean that Office should be recognised as an “appropriate law enforcement authority” and take an active role in investigating suspected corruption.

www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/16/igs-need-subpoena-power/

www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1988/0020/latest/DLM129462.html

www.oag.govt.nz/central-govt/2003-04/part8.htm/?searchterm=fraud

 



Additional governance arrangements in UK civil service

16 December 2010

The UK Cabinet Office has announced the appointment of leaders from across the private and public sectors as Non-Executive Board Members (NEBMs) to Whitehall Boards.  These boards are a novel variation on the traditional civil service model of heads of departments being responsible to their portfolio Minister.   The British Government considers that the use of departmental  boards enables agencies to operate in a more business-like manner.

The appointees are experienced in improving performance across a wide range of industries. The Cabinet Office has indicated that “they will play a key role in shaking up governance across Whitehall and ensuring the right strategic leadership is in place so departments can meet the Government’s challenging reform programme.”

In New Zealand, Ministers often set up advisory committees to provide subject matter expertise, but replicating the new British arrangements may constrain the ability of a departmental chief executive to give effect to State Sector Act responsibilities to their Minister.

The UK Civil Service was established formally by statute earlier this year, despite its existence for more than 150 years.  The arrangement for non executive boards was not considered during the lengthy parliamentary development of the legislation.  In a paper published in November, Professors Richards and Smith (University of Sheffield) explore the recalibrating of government in Britain, and the move from a hybrid of the Westminster model to the “Big Society”.

www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/news/uk-leaders-appointed-support-whitehall%E2%80%99s-transformation

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/content/enhanced-departmental-boards-protocol

www.sog-rc27.org/paper/berlin2010/Richards-Smith_Final_Draft.pdf

www.civilservice.gov.uk/news/2010/may/civil-service-legislation.aspx

www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1988/0020/latest/DLM129548.html#DLM129548

Inland Revenue earns brownie points

15 December 2010
Bloggers are seldom in the habit of complimenting State servants or the agencies they work for. Right wing bloggers would seem less predisposed to do so than others. A posting today, however, not only compliments IRD on its effective online support, but has elicited a string of similarly approving comments. These responses reflect findings of the Kiwis Count survey which measures New Zealanders’ satisfaction with services received from government agencies. Satisfaction in turn contributes to levels of trust. Paying tax is not an interaction with the State that naturally engenders satisfaction, and is unlikely to ever be rated as highly as activities like using national parks. However the commitment of IRD to improving the help it can give to its “customers” is a reflection of the spirit of service embodied in the State Services code of conduct ( and referred to in the State Sector Act. )

Interestingly, three weeks ago another right wing blogger wrote in a similarly complimentary fashion about the leadership of the Auditor General and her department.

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/12/ird_service.htm
http://www.whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/2010/11/15/sunlight-is-the-best-disinfectant

http://www.ssc.govt.nz/factsheets-kiwiscount-2009

World Bank and New Zealand Auditor-General share a concern about declining standards

14 December 2010

The World Bank coordinated a meeting last week of the International Corruption Hunters Alliance.  This network involving anticorruption officials from 134 countries, was discussing how to do more to investigate and prosecute corrupt actors including those who defraud World Bank projects.  The Bank president spoke of the need to trigger a moral revulsion as well as a legal reaction in places where “…corruption buys impunity, strangles fair opportunity, cripples competition, encourages conflict, stalls economic transformation and chokes growth.”

The Corruption Hunters Alliance, meeting for the first time, considers that some promising successes against corruption achieved by smaller networks would be amplified by their larger alliance. While investigating and sanctioning  corruption, the Alliance seeks opportunities to embrace integrity.

Concern about diminished integrity underpins the Office of the Auditor General’s report NZ Central Government : Results of 2009/2010 audits tabled in Parliament today. Investigations have uncovered deep seated problems, reflecting systemic and cultural issues within some organisations. Public sector leaders are reminded by the Auditor General that it is important to be vigilant about values, organisational culture, and basic systems.  “It is possible for practice to drift away from its roots and for individual decisions to start to go awry, especially in long-standing areas of activity.”

The summary also includes data about the reporting standards of Tertiary Education Institutes, State Owned Enterprises and Government Departments.  Fewer departmental reports received the ‘very good’ marking given to most TEIs and SOEs.

http://www.financialtaskforce.org/2010/12/09/highlights-from-the-international-corruption-hunters-alliance-conference-at-the-world-bank/

http://www.oag.govt.nz/central-govt/2009-10/part10.html

http://www.oag.govt.nz/central-govt/2009-10/part3.html

 

 

SEC whistle-blower proposals and NZ protected disclosures provisions

13 December 2010

A Harvard Law School blog published yesterday echoes other criticisms of  Securities and Exchange Commission whistle-blower proposals. The SEC is encouraging bounty hunters – business insiders well informed about unlawful practices – by offering substantial rewards for original information. The concern is that handsomely rewarding information if it is not already known to the  SEC, will discourage use of companies’ internal complaint processes . Delay may undermine the “original” character of the information.

Regardless of what SEC does, the blog item highlights the need  to take very similar actions to those expected of New Zealand agencies under the Protected Disclosures Act.  These form part of the 2010 State Services Integrity survey recommendations, as a consequence of the generally low awareness in agencies of their whistle-blowing expectations;

  • review policies and procedures
  • raise employees awareness and commitment to internal disclosure of wrong doing
  • reinforce the protected disclosure process as the “right thing” to do
  • review agency policies to ensure the  protections against retaliation will be effective
  • ensure the policy is regularly republished.

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2010/12/12/new-sec-whistleblower-rules-fall-short/ #more-14350

http://www.ssc.govt.nz/display/document.asp?docid=7815&pageno=7#P98_8890

Corruption Matters (edition 36)

12 December 2010

Corruption Matters is the half yearly newsletter published by the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption.  It includes reports about investigations.  Problems in the NSW public sector are unlikely to be substantially different in kind from what is occurring, if on a much lesser scale, in New Zealand. Issues reported in Corruption Matters should be a “heads up” for managers in New Zealand agencies.

The latest edition of Corruption Matters explores risks highlighted by recent investigations.  ICAC is concerned about corrupt procurement practices in agencies.  It is important that procurement managers are trained in the related threats.  Poor employment practices have also precipitated incidents recently.  Corruption Matters articles explore the consequences of inadequate pre-employment checking – and  pre-emptive resignations when officials avoid the consequences when misconduct is being investigated. A risk to good government is that such people may be reemployed by another agency.

Fraud alleged recently relating to the acquisition of ACC office accommodation, and the disclosure of exaggerated experience claimed by the chief defence scientist, confirm that NSW problems are likely to be shared in New Zealand.

http://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/GE1011/S00121/sfo-decides-to-press-charges-in-acc-fraud-case.htm

http://www.humanresources.co.nz/Site/HR_Info/Knowledge_Base/Staffing_and_Recruitment/Articles_List/CV_Fraud.aspx

New Queensland code of conduct

11 December 2010

This week, the Queensland government published a code of conduct for people working in State agencies. The code will replace existing agency-specific codes. It will come into force on 1 January 2011. It specifies four public service principles, the values inherent in each principle, and the standards of conduct expressed in statements to reflect and support the principles and values.

The four statutory principles are
integrity and impartiality,
promoting the public good,
commitment to the system of government, and
accountability and transparency

The code booklet includes 12 pages of values and standards explaining these principles.

Some characteristics of the New Zealand State Services code of conduct are reflected in this new Queensland code. Most notable is the collective ownership of the principles. Queensland has adopted the expression “we will…” to introduce each of the behaviour standards in the code. This was central to the NZ code when issued in 2007 and is now increasingly common in private sector codes.
http://www.psc.qld.gov.au/library/document/catalogue/equity-ethics-grievance/qps-code-conduct.pdf
http://www.ssc.govt.nz/code

2010 Corruption Barometer

10 December 2010

Around the World, 1 in 4 people say that in the last year they have paid a bribe to receive public services.  This is disclosed in the data collected by Transparency International for its 7th annual corruption barometer released yesterday.  The survey gathers the experiences of more than 91,000 people in 86 countries.  The results indicate that corruption is increasing, and is seen to be doing so more dramatically in the EU and North America than any other regions.

This year, for the first time, responses from New Zealanders are included in the survey. Their contributions are unsettling.  73% indicated that they saw an increase in corruption in New Zealand.  4% said they had paid a bribe in the last year – this compares with 5% in USA, 2% in Australia, 1% in Britain and none in Denmark.

Where 1 is not at all corrupt and 5 means being very corrupt, sectors in New Zealand were rated as follows:

Parliament  3.2,  Business sector  3.2,  Religious bodies  3.1,  Media  3.1,  Public officials  3.0,     Police  2.7,   NGOs  2.6,  Judiciary  2.5,  Education system 2.4,  Military  2.2 .

These sector ratings were generally less favourable than in the Scandinavian countries with which New Zealand is commonly compared – eg New Zealand Public officials, Police and the Judiciary were rated as more corrupt than in Finland, Denmark and Norway.   This may reflect incidents in New Zealand which have received media coverage recently.  New Zealand and Scandinavian governments are seen as being similarly effective in their efforts to fight corruption.

The survey shows that 70% of people would report a corrupt act if they saw one, although if they were victims of corruption, this drops to about half.  Transparency International commented that “the message from the 2010 Barometer is that corruption is insidious. It makes people lose faith. The good news is that people are ready to act.”

http://transparency.org/news_room/latest_news/press_releases/2010/2010_12_09_gcb2010_en

Getting Talking Again

9 December 2010

Today is International Anti Corruption Day.  It seems an auspicious time to relaunch  Integrity Talking Points.

This blog began on the New Zealand Public Sector Intranet before migrating in March 2010 to the e.govt blog. With that site being redeveloped the daily posts need a new home.

The international perception about the New Zealand public sector is that we have very low levels of corruption. That is a toanga.  There is a continuing need to safeguard such treasure.  That’s the purpose of the blog.  As the name suggests, this is a vehicle to highlight integrity issues. All of us who work in the public sector, need to be aware of the importance of trustworthy behaviour and the influence our actions have on public perceptions of government.  That requires integrity.

Media, worldwide, report unceasingly about incidents of maladministration, corrupt practice and self serving officials. Knowing what occurs elsewhere can alert us to possible threats to our standards of integrity. Integrity Talking Points seeks to promote conversations about these matters. Raised awareness may help reinforce the spirit of service which permeates public service in New Zealand.

http://blog.e.govt.nz/index.php/2010/03/12/introduction-to-integrity-talking-points-8-12-march-2010/

Anti Corruption Day

Some countries will be making an effort to mark this UN designated event.  Largely unaffected by corruption and therefore uninterested in the deleterious consequences corruption has in much of the world, few New Zealanders will be conscious of the day’s designation.

The UN also uses the day to focus on the UN Convention Against Corruption.  Most states are ratified parties. In New Zealand some legislative changes are necessary before we can fulfill convention obligations. Together with Germany, Czech Republic, Japan and Ireland we are the only developed countries among an equally small number of other states not to have “signed up”.

Corruption has been in the news in New Zealand recently with the court rejecting the appeal brought by former Minister Phillip Field against his conviction under Crimes Act provisions relating to corruption and bribery of an MP, and recent conviction of the first prison officer prosecuted under bribery and corruption of a law enforcement officer provisions.

http://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3769-uncac-in-a-nutshell.pdf

http://www.altiusdirectory.com/Society/international-anti-corruption-day.php

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/62821/ex-mp-field-fails-in-appeal-against-conviction-and-sentence

http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=122046&fm=newsarticle%20-%20National,nrhl