The passing of the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill, now set to become law, was described by State Services Minister Jonathan Coleman as ''the biggest transformation to the public service in a generation'' and according to its introduction aims to ''establish a framework to support and encourage innovative, flexible, efficient state services''.
The Bill states the changes ''are designed to strengthen collaboration throughout the state sector system, to improve financial flexibility, and to provide more meaningful performance information for scrutiny by Parliament.''
The legislation is comprehensive, amending the State Sector, Public Finance and Crown Entities Acts - the three principal statutes governing the management of the state sector and public finances in New Zealand.
Collaboration, efficiency and transparency are worthy - if broad - aims, and as such the legislation has been supported by the Labour Party, albeit with amendments. The bipartisan support possibly explains the Bill's relatively low-profile progression into law, although it is also likely the changes have slipped largely under the radar as the ''average'' New Zealander has little knowledge and perhaps interest in the ''less than sexy'' world of state services.
Certainly there is not much to ''thrill''. But the state sector is in many ways the engine room of the country, with its departments responsible for driving our publicly-funded services. The ability of those departments to function well is vital - as is the accountability of staff and their chief executives. While a well-oiled machine attracts little comment, when the wheels fall off there is understandably public outrage.
The raft of issues plaguing the Ministry of Education in the past two years (including the Christchurch school closures process, the flawed Novopay payroll system and the relationship breakdown between Education Minister Hekia Parata and chief executive Lesley Longstone, which ultimately led to her resignation, followed by those of another two senior staff members) are a case in point. It seems the legislative changes are partly in response to public concerns. Dr Coleman admits ''there is a long way to go to deliver the improved services that New Zealanders expect''.
The legislation is part of the Government's ''Better Public Service'' programme, which makes no bones about the difficulties faced in ''increasing public expectations for improved services and a demand for improvements in addressing complex, long-term issues that matter to New Zealanders'' given the ''tight financial constraints'' of the global financial crisis. But doing so is a priority for the Government, which has identified five main areas to be targeted: reducing long-term welfare dependence, supporting vulnerable children, boosting skills and employment, reducing crime, and improving interaction with government.
The main changes in the state sector legislation include financial flexibility; giving the State Services Commissioner greater responsibility over chief executives and senior leaders; giving chief executives greater powers to delegate functions, including to non-government organisations, and the responsibility for considering collective interests of government and longer-term sustainability; and the option of setting up an operational ''departmental agency'', within a department to carry out a specific service.
The main concerns held by opposition parties relate to chief executives delegating responsibility for services to those outside the public service as they fear it will erode accountability. Opposition parties and the Public Service Association are also not comfortable with changes - although amended - relating to state servants' contracts.
State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie has been tasked with implementing the changes. It will be a balancing act. There are some who perceive the state sector as being needlessly bureaucratic. Others are concerned the Government's push for better services has seen important positions axed, experienced staff lost and funding reduced in vital areas. But if tough times call for tough action, it is reassuring the changes have passed with overwhelming approval.
