Quality public services ensure that we are all able to be healthy, educated, and safe and have access to the information we need.  Through our public services we can collectively ensure that every New Zealander has the opportunity to meet their full potential.

Yes, Labour believes our public sector does a first class job for New Zealand.  Our public service is among the best internationally.  Labour has been rebuilding the capacity of the public service.  The high level of satisfaction reflects this commitment.

Labour believes that the tax cuts delivered in the 2008 Budget are fair and responsible and can be delivered without cuts to public services.  Tax cuts of a larger magnitude can only be funded by cutting public services or increasing government debt.

New Zealanders saw the impact of cuts to public services during the 1990s.  Since Labour took office we have been rebuilding our public services and we do not intend to undo that work to pay for unaffordable tax cuts.

Labour believes that the public sector offers competitive remuneration.  We encourage collective bargaining and the implementation of programmes such as pay equity and work-life balance.  We have strengthened the introduction of common leave provisions and will keep strengthening incentives to get bright and innovative New Zealanders working in the public sector.

Yes.  Involving unions in decisions is a modern and farsighted approach to industrial relations in the workplace.  We recognise a common interest in developing a modern, innovative public service.  Labour is committed to building a high wage, high skill, and highly productive public service.

Public services touch all our lives in very real ways.  A strong public service is vital to the delivery of quality Government services to the public, in a timely, efficient way. Ministers and the public must be able to have confidence in the neutrality of the public service.  The service itself must be able to respect the authority of the government of the day.  National believes public sector workplaces in the future need to be high-trust workplaces, to make the most of the energy and ideas of those who work within them.  A National government would seek to ensure frontline public services are maintained and enhanced.

Efficiency and productivity are live issues within the public service, and we should always aim higher.  National will cap the core Wellington bureaucracy, which has grown faster than any other sector of the economy.  This does not mean cuts to frontline services. This means National will streamline decision-making, and trust the public service more to use its initiative.  Over time we will address the frustration your members feel in the many layers of management which have been allowed to develop.  National will have a pragmatic approach to cap the core bureaucracy, and target the delivery of frontline services.  For instance, in healthcare, National believes those professionals working at the frontline should be trusted to have greater influence on policy and decision-making within hospitals.  That’s the sort of approach we could see making a real difference.       

The assertion in this question is incorrect.  Tax cuts have been delivered year-on-year in Australia, with the consequence that the wage gap has got wider and wider, and more kiwis have packed up and left.  The newly elected Labor Government is continuing with tax cuts.  Clearly, there is consensus in Australia that tax cuts do not necessarily have to result in cuts to frontline services.  Even Michael Cullen now appears to share that view.  National believes tax cuts should be a routine part of Government business in a growing economy. A growing economy can afford tax cuts as well as the social services we have all come to expect and definitely deserve.

National has a policy to cap the core bureaucracy at around 36,000 in our first term in government.  It has grown from 26,000 since 2000.  We will do more with the bureaucrats we have.

National has no plans to cut the wages of public servants.  In the private sector, good people are paid what they’re worth, and in the high-trust model which National is planning, competent and capable public servants will be critical to the success of our programme to grow New Zealand’s economy and enhance our living standards.

National wants to harness the energy and the professionalism of the public service.  No political party has a monopoly on good ideas.  National will trust the public service to offer up good ideas and enthusiasm, to enhance and improve the delivery of public services.  Under National, unions will still be an important part of the work-place landscape.   

Delivery of services to the public through a strong public service is one of the cornerstones of a healthy democracy.  The Green Party will not support the privatisation or otherwise weakening through contracting arrangements of public service agencies.

While the Green Party acknowledges high overall satisfaction with public services, we consider that there is still room for improvement, particularly in the Ministry of Social Development, Accident Compensation Commission, and Inland Revenue Department.

The Green Party supports establishing a tax-free zone at the bottom end of the income tax scale.  It will be funded by taxes and levies on waste and pollution—not by cutting or privatising public services.

The Green Party believes public sector expenditure should be determined by the needs of the public, not set at an arbitrary figure.  Cutting public service expenditure by $500m would inevitably result in a weakening of service delivery to the public.

The Green Party believes remuneration at the bottom end of the wage scale is too low, in both the public and private sectors.  We support setting the minimum wage at 66% of the average wage—currently about $15 an hour.

The Green Party will implement policies to improve workplace democracy and improve workers’ union representation and participation in the future of their work, including strengthening the ability to access multi-employer collective bargaining.

One of the foundational pillars of the Māori Party is that of whanau – whanau wellbeing, whanau led solutions, whanau development.  Accessible, high quality public services are critical for whanau to flourish.  They must be relevant to ensure community participation is maximised.

Both show commendable developments.  For the Māori Party, further areas for development include additional and quality provision of kaupapa Maori services, and the eradication of institutional racism from all public services with has impacted negatively on access and responsiveness.

The Māori Party advocates substantial tax cuts for low-income families, and would support off-setting these with increased taxation of high income earners to prevent cuts to public services.  Public services need to be funded appropriately and be designed to liberate, not oppress.

Many public services - particularly in health, education, social services, transport – are significantly underfunded.  Funding needs to be sufficient to provide the accessible, high quality, relevant services that the public needs and expects, including whanau requiring kaupapa Māori services.

The priority of the Māori Party is to increase the remuneration of low-income workers through increasing the minimum wage to $15 per hour.  We would ensure public sector staff are able to work through their union to address pay concerns.

The Māori Party is very supportive of partnerships which include and empower workers and unions in decisions affecting their working environment.  We would also be very supportive of initiatives to address and promote Māori workforce development in the public sector.

The primary benefit of strong public services is that they are better able to deliver necessary services to New Zealanders in a timely, efficient and effective manner.

For the most part yes, however, there is always room for improvement.  It is true that many ACC accident victims have raised concerns with us which, in some cases, reflect poorly on ACC personnel.

It is a question of balance.  It depends on the size of the cuts.  We believe it is possible to reduce tax rates without cutting public services.  We would not support any tax cuts that would result in inferior public services or lead to large-scale privatisation.

Again, we believe it is possible to cut income tax or GST without negatively affecting the public sector.  It depends on the size of any reductions.  We would oppose cuts that would result in large cuts to public services or lead to large-scale privatisation.

There are some high flyers but in a general sense New Zealand is a low-wage economy.  We must look to grow our economy to raise wages and living standards for all, including those in the public sector.

Yes, in principle, in regard to operational matters.  There could be circumstances, as in the private sector, where management needs to make decisions without consultation.  However, always there is the moral obligation to take workers likely concerns into consideration.

UnitedFuture recognises the contribution a strong public sector makes to New Zealand’s economic and social wellbeing, particularly in those areas of activity traditionally seen as the preserve of government.

We have noted the PriceWaterhouseCoopers analysis of the ACC and the SSC survey to which you refer, and would generally concur with those findings.

We do not see the current tax cuts leading to significant cuts in public expenditure, nor do we support that.  We believe tax cuts are affordable as the dividend of the economic recovery of recent years.

We do not see the tax cuts leading to any significant impact on public sector jobs or services.

In general terms, we believe that the current level of public service remuneration is about right.  However, there will always be areas where more needs to be done to attract and retain quality staff, and we should not shirk our responsibility in this regard.

We strongly support the Partnership for Quality initiative.

Strong public serv ices are an essential component in making New Zealand a 'fair go' society by ensuring that people get the services they need in their communities and in delivering these on the basis of that need and not upon ability to pay. That has been so since our inception as a British colony in 1840 - from which point they played a key role in our development - and enjoyed a considerable boost arising from the depression of the thirties and a determination to create a welfare state as a result. We strongly support the need for the continuing role of our public services in delivering for our economy and our society.

New Zealand is very lucky in having not only high levels of efficiency and service delivery to those who use these services, but historic and continuing low levels of corruption. We need to keep things that way and we give no credence to critics who fall back on vague generalisations about 'bureaucracy' and other pejorative criticisms, or cliches about the private sector or 'the market' doing it better.

Large tax cuts go hand in hand with significant reductions in public services. Nothing is for nothing and if citizens want these services then they must be paid for. It is naive or disingenuous to claim otherwise.

 The answer to this question follows from 3 above. While it is perfectly legitimate to review and change tax thresholds to take account of fiscal drag anything which goes beyond that and the requirements of prudent fiscal management will damage the public sector significantly as well as meaning higher levels of debt with all that entails for both inflation and imposing burdens on future generations for short term political gain. We think that this is cynical and those who claim that these will not be the consequences are at best mistaken and at worst are deliberately misleading voters.

Until the later eighties, the public service had a workable and equitable system of wage fixing which took account of the unique nature of the public sector, and which was based on the principle of fair comparability. The Progressives and their predecessor parties have long held that it was a mistake to abandon this system. The result has been in the medium term a decline in the relative pay rates and working conditions in the public sector, although some of this ground is now being recovered through national agreements and codes negotiated with collective worker representatives. We endorse this development and would like to see it continue.

The collective involvement of workers through their unions is crucial to the successful resolution of problems which arise in the workplace and it is to be encouraged as far as possible as the key to responsible and fair bargaining in both public and private sectors. This principle is fully endorsed by the Progressive Party, and we have no sympathy with those who are ideologically opposed to unionism.