Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche
Photo: VNP/Louis Collins
The integrity of New Zealand’s public service was under the microscope at Parliament this week, when the Governance and Administration committee received their final Long Term Insights Briefing from the Public Service Commission.
Long Term Insights Briefings (LTIBs) were an initiative introduced by the previous government.
Every three years, Crown entities have been required to step back from day-to-day operations and look towards the horizon, identifying future trends, challenges, and opportunities within their policy areas.
The government is transitioning to a single triennial LTIB, coming from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (see more below).
The goal of LTIBs is to strengthen governments’ long-term thinking and give Parliament better tools to scrutinise priorities.
Agencies writing the briefings can outline the strengths and weaknesses of policy options, though they stop short of recommending a preferred approach.
The public is consulted twice during the process: first on the topic and later on the draft briefing. Once consultation is complete, the briefing goes to the responsible minister, who tables it in Parliament. A select committee then kicks the
tires.
That’s what was happening this week, with the Public Service Commission taking its turn in select committee.
Their chosen topic: the integrity of the public service.
Integrity is one of those words a high-school principal might rattle off in an assembly, or something you see listed in the “desired candidate qualities” section of a job ad. But what does it mean when applied to state institutions?
According to the Commission, public service integrity means complying with ethics, the law, professional standards, and political neutrality, all with the underlying goal of maintaining public trust in government institutions.
Why choose this topic now?
According to the Public Service Commissioner, Sir Brian Roche, “integrity as a principle is under challenge … globally, and [it’s] under challenge in New Zealand.”
New Zealand recently recorded its lowest-ever score on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, alongside a drop in ranking (albeit to fourth place out of 181 countries).
Predictably, the headline ‘New Zealand drops down corruption index’ has raised questions. Committee members were quick to probe that demotion during this week’s hearing.
Roche and his colleagues acknowledged the concern but pointed to other indicators they say remain strong barometers of integrity.
“The work we’ve started doing is working with the OECD in 2023 so we’ve engaged with them on their trust survey. At the moment, the latest results are in terms of service experience – 84 percent of New Zealanders are satisfied. That’s actually the highest ranking we’ve had on that series,” said Hugo Vitalis, deputy chief executive of the Strategy, Policy and Integrity group.
“In addition, public trust in the public service has gone up to 64 percent. For comparison trust in the private sector (though that’s increased quite significantly) is 51 percent, so quite a bit lower.”
Vitalis argued the Transparency International rankings themselves are somewhat opaque, saying they are “rather ironically not that transparent about the methodology and index.”
NZ First MP Andy Foster
Photo: VNP/Louis Collins
The future of Long Term Insight Briefings
The Public Service Amendment Bill, currently under debate, is contentious on several fronts.
Among the issues are the proposed changes to DEI settings and appointment processes, a requirement for public service chief executives to reapply for their roles at the end of their terms, and a reduction in the number of Long Term Insights Briefings from 34 reports down to a single consolidated briefing produced by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
New Zealand First MP Andy Foster sought the Commission’s view, asking if collapsing dozens of briefings into one would strengthen the process and avoid unnecessary work, or instead weaken the government’s foresight?
“Would you choose to do the LTIB because it’s worth doing it as opposed to because you have to do it?” Foster asked.
“The government policy is clear, there will be one Long Term Insights Briefing,” Roche answered, diplomatically.
Vitalis added that much of the analysis underpinning LTIBs already forms part of the Commission’s regular work anyway. What distinguishes the briefings, he suggested, is the public consultation aspect, as well as the parliamentary scrutiny built into the process.
“This is core to our business. We would do it whether we were mandated or not, because in order to do what we have to do, we have to think and innovate,” Roche said.
Having examined the Public Service Amendment Bill last month, the Committee’s session with the Commission offered MPs a chance to reflect on more existential questions surrounding the public service.
Whether Long Term Insights Briefings are a valuable foresight tool or an expendable duty, and whether concerns about integrity, transparency, or neutrality point to real problems within the state apparatus or only to public perceptions and distrust.
You can listen to the audio version of this story by clicking the link near the top of the page.
*RNZ’s The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament’s Office of the Clerk.