A Cut Above – Why Dismantling the Public Service May Not be a Good Idea

If you live outside of the bubble that is Wellington (or even many who live within it) you know that with a change of government comes the inevitable ‘reset’.? This always involves a set of new priorities as the incoming government ‘stamps their mark’ on the public service and plays a straight bat to the doubters who claimed that when push comes to shove, the campaign promises would wilt like a deciduous tree in autumn. As Labour stepped over the bodies of fallen comrades lying strewn across the battlefield, they contemplated life in opposition and licked their wounds as they contemplated 3 years in exile. A number of generals decided they had seen enough and chose a simpler life outside of politics. This is also an inevitability after a heavy loss.

?

As the coalition got comfortable in the war room, one of the first targets was ‘wasteful spending’. To do this the government issued an order from the depths of the Beehive, every CEO in the public service was expected to – ‘reduce your costs by 6-8%’. I could hear the cheering and frivolity from milking sheds, barn doors and gate posts all across the rural hinterlands as the reduction in these ‘bureaucrats’ will finally see some common sense bought back into the democracy of this country. No more faceless Public Servants getting paid exorbitant amounts of money to place unnecessary red tape and inconvenience on the hard working folk of this country. To justify this (as if justification was needed) the coalition comfortably rolled off stats about how much the Public Service had ballooned under Labour and their desire to restore balance and rigor by getting rid of consultants and ‘back office’ roles. Instead, focusing every tax dollar on the delivery of front line services. This is an over simplified and dangerous way to look at the role of the public service.

?

The stark reality remains – Aotearoa needs a well-functioning public service (whether you think we do or not), and setting targets to reduce costs without thoughtful and considered analysis and strategic oversight will undoubtedly make things worse for us all, It will definitely not make it better. Here is why:

?

When challenged on what these public service cuts will look like, politicians deflect to the CEO’s of these Ministries and Departments as an ‘operational matter’. By framing this as part of the 100 day plan, politicians are placing an incredible amount of pressure on CEO’s to reduce back office roles and broader costs with some urgency. Every CEO in the public service knows that they are on notice, so let the culling begin. To achieve this many CEO’s have offered all staff voluntary redundancy (that’s right, all staff), entire units have been disestablished, some Ministries have even set up ‘cost reduction working groups’. Not only is this counterproductive, blunt and lacking nuance, it serves as a catch all that indiscriminately looks at all public service spending as equal. Its like lining every public servant up in the drafting race and hoping you get put into the ‘still got a job’ pen. If not its into the back of the truck and off to the works. This ‘culling’ approach puts at risk the areas that may actually need additional investment not less!

?

Communications and PR are often trotted out as back office functions which appear to have grown exponentially since Labour moved into the big house six years ago. It is easy to use this as a trojan horse for all back office roles being ‘persona non grata’ when many of these back office functions are critical to the success of the very front line delivery the government purports to value. If you take away the person in the back office answering the phone or collating time sheets, a police officer or nurse needs to do it instead! The reality is this – without a considered and critical analysis of the entire system, it is impossible to know whether a back office position is needed or not. HR, Finance, Corporate Services, are all critical to the well-functioning of any business (including the public service).? The public service (like many other professions) have some incredibly talented and competent people. Undermining the integrity of their contribution through an arbitrary number belittles the skill and expertise they have, and the difference they will continue to make. We need these people in the public service and we can’t afford to lose them through burn out and low morale. Can there be savings in the system – absolutely. Do we want to see waste in the public service – of course not! But we need to focus on delivery and ensure the CEO’s in the public service are accountable for the delivery of outcomes, but this cannot be done with a gun to their heads and one hand tied behind their backs. We should be demanding that Ministries and Departments deliver on expectations, and resource them (front and back of house) to deliver. ?I want the public service to deliver, and this might cost 6% more than what we pay now. But that’s OK if its important. Having a cold beer after mowing the lawns on a hot afternoon is unnecessary and wasteful, but take it away and the lawns will never look the same. Maybe I will pay someone to mow them in future, I hear some public servants now mow lawns, and I will have a beer with them after they are done.