PSA

What's at stake

The work we do

In announcing his "razor gang" to cut government spending, National Leader John Key has his facts wrong. Without recognising the mistake, Mr. Key threatens the public services on which Kiwis depend, and which they value.

National’s policy paper states: "since 2000 the number of people who are employed in central government administration has grown from 25,900 to 39,400. These are people who are mainly engaged in formulating and administering government policies."

Not so. And left uncorrected, the razor’s edge will not cut mythical administrators that Mr. Key says reach almost 40,000. Instead, it will slice services away from communities and jobs away from hard-working New Zealanders just as we are battered by the world’s biggest financial crisis since the Depression.

Mr. Key’s figure refers to the entire public service, which does include people working on policy from public health to climate change. It also includes DOC rangers, probation officers, prison guards, mental health nurses, customs agents, scientists at research institutes, call centre operators for KiwiSaver, social workers and court staff.

These jobs plainly are not "mainly engaged in formulating and administering" policy. Claiming they do shows major flaws in National’s approach, which disturbingly seems to be a rehashing of the worst of the nineties, and gutting public services.

On one hand, Mr. Key wants new prisons and tougher probation. On the other, he says staff who will deliver them are administrators. Indeed, National’s Wellington-bashing also overlooks that almost 60 per cent of the public service works elsewhere. And that many workers in the capital deliver the same public services that people everywhere receive.

Moreover, the growth in the public service deserves a context that is sadly missing. Mr. Key is right that it’s grown since 1999. During the 1990s, public services were shaved to their weakest level since World War II. But today’s public service—the true number is 42,000—is still 8,000 people smaller than in 1990, despite population growth of 700,000.

Many New Zealanders remember the 1990s. Razor gangs got to work on benefits, causing inequality to soar. The public service was hit. Privatisation grew, often resulting in foreign asset-stripping and onerous user pays. Since then, public sector growth of 11 per cent has been less than the 13 per cent growth in the workforce at large.

No less than the OECD says New Zealand’s public service is smaller than the average in developed countries. Including states and territories, our public service is also smaller than Australia’s on a per capita basis.

Though Mr. Key’s words of appreciation for the public service are welcome, the underlying assumption is ill-thought-out. Take, for example, regulation.

Recently, there has been a raft of failures overseas in everything from food safety to toxic paint on children’s toys to a spectacular meltdown in American financial markets. After each disaster, "bureaucrats" are not sacked. Government oversight is instead toughened.

That New Zealand has largely escaped such crises is in part credit to the diligence of public servants. It’s too easy to demonise regulations, or those who devise and enforce them, but as President Bush has discovered to his peril, glib sound-bites about waste are often just that.

So consider one of National’s favourite statistics: communications staff growing by 13 per cent. Underneath the statistic is 57 more people. What do they do? National doesn’t say. It could be bio-security at airports; alerting us to the dangers of didymo; or preparing enrolment campaigns for the current election. All useless?

Similarly, National likes to point to ministry staff growing faster than teachers or nurses. It is a statistic for a statistic’s sake. The two biggest areas of public sector growth are education and health. Percentages aside, there are more than 4,000 new nurses and another 1,400 new doctors in the health sector alone.

But if a staff of two grew to three—at the Ministry of Health, say, to provide technical support to a hospital with more computers—that’s a 50 per cent increase. On paper, they’re administrators. In real life, they are indispensable to providing valued services.

A more accurate gauge, however, is looking at where large numbers of bodies, not percentages, have been added. Hamilton has 370 new staff at Inland Revenue. They are mainly call centre operators, helping more than 800,000 people sign up to KiwiSaver.

There were 807 more prison officers from 2000 to 2006, and 400 more workers in new jails in Waikato and Otago.

These workers are included in the numbers Mr. Key uses to paint a picture of a ballooning bureaucracy, deserving a razor’s sharp edge. Unfortunately, his underlying premise is wrong, which we hope is rectified before the guillotine starts to fall.

Brenda Pilott is national secretary of the Public Service Association (PSA).




What's at stake The work we do Benefits to NZ Fairness at Work What parties say What Kiwis say Just the facts Contact Us	In announcing his "razor gang" to cut government spending, National Leader John Key has his facts wrong. Without recognising the mistake, Mr. Key threatens the public services on which Kiwis depend, and which they value. National’s policy paper states: "since 2000 the number of people who are employed in central government administration has grown from 25,900 to 39,400. These are people who are mainly engaged in formulating and administering government policies." Not so. And left uncorrected, the razor’s edge will not cut mythical administrators that Mr. Key says reach almost 40,000. Instead, it will slice services away from communities and jobs away from hard-working New Zealanders just as we are battered by the world’s biggest financial crisis since the Depression. Mr. Key’s figure refers to the entire public service, which does include people working on policy from public health to climate change. It also includes DOC rangers, probation officers, prison guards, mental health nurses, customs agents, scientists at research institutes, call centre operators for KiwiSaver, social workers and court staff. These jobs plainly are not "mainly engaged in formulating and administering" policy. Claiming they do shows major flaws in National’s approach, which disturbingly seems to be a rehashing of the worst of the nineties, and gutting public services. On one hand, Mr. Key wants new prisons and tougher probation. On the other, he says staff who will deliver them are administrators. Indeed, National’s Wellington-bashing also overlooks that almost 60 per cent of the public service works elsewhere. And that many workers in the capital deliver the same public services that people everywhere receive. Moreover, the growth in the public service deserves a context that is sadly missing. Mr. Key is right that it’s grown since 1999. During the 1990s, public services were shaved to their weakest level since World War II. But today’s public service—the true number is 42,000—is still 8,000 people smaller than in 1990, despite population growth of 700,000. Many New Zealanders remember the 1990s. Razor gangs got to work on benefits, causing inequality to soar. The public service was hit. Privatisation grew, often resulting in foreign asset-stripping and onerous user pays. Since then, public sector growth of 11 per cent has been less than the 13 per cent growth in the workforce at large. No less than the OECD says New Zealand’s public service is smaller than the average in developed countries. Including states and territories, our public service is also smaller than Australia’s on a per capita basis. Though Mr. Key’s words of appreciation for the public service are welcome, the underlying assumption is ill-thought-out. Take, for example, regulation. Recently, there has been a raft of failures overseas in everything from food safety to toxic paint on children’s toys to a spectacular meltdown in American financial markets. After each disaster, "bureaucrats" are not sacked. Government oversight is instead toughened. That New Zealand has largely escaped such crises is in part credit to the diligence of public servants. It’s too easy to demonise regulations, or those who devise and enforce them, but as President Bush has discovered to his peril, glib sound-bites about waste are often just that. So consider one of National’s favourite statistics: communications staff growing by 13 per cent. Underneath the statistic is 57 more people. What do they do? National doesn’t say. It could be bio-security at airports; alerting us to the dangers of didymo; or preparing enrolment campaigns for the current election. All useless? Similarly, National likes to point to ministry staff growing faster than teachers or nurses. It is a statistic for a statistic’s sake. The two biggest areas of public sector growth are education and health. Percentages aside, there are more than 4,000 new nurses and another 1,400 new doctors in the health sector alone. But if a staff of two grew to three—at the Ministry of Health, say, to provide technical support to a hospital with more computers—that’s a 50 per cent increase. On paper, they’re administrators. In real life, they are indispensable to providing valued services. A more accurate gauge, however, is looking at where large numbers of bodies, not percentages, have been added. Hamilton has 370 new staff at Inland Revenue. They are mainly call centre operators, helping more than 800,000 people sign up to KiwiSaver. There were 807 more prison officers from 2000 to 2006, and 400 more workers in new jails in Waikato and Otago. These workers are included in the numbers Mr. Key uses to paint a picture of a ballooning bureaucracy, deserving a razor’s sharp edge. Unfortunately, his underlying premise is wrong, which we hope is rectified before the guillotine starts to fall. Brenda Pilott is national secretary of the Public Service Association (PSA).