A government initiative has attracted the predictable amount of criticism even before it has been launched as the Labour Party and others rail against the introduction of a social bond to focus on mental health.
Social bonds, in which the return for investors will be partially determined by whether or not agreed social targets have been achieved, are relatively new and untested.
In 2011, Peterborough Prison, in the United Kingdom, issued one of the first social impact bonds anywhere in the world.
The bond raised 5 million from 17 social investors to fund a pilot project with the objective of reducing reoffending rates of short-term prisoners.
The relapse or re-conviction rates of prisoners released from Peterborough will be compared with the relapse rate of a control group of prisoners over six years.
If Peterborough's re-conviction rates are at least 7.5% below the rates of the control group, investors receive an increasing return that is directly proportional to the difference in relapse rates between the two groups and is capped at 13% annually over an eight-year period.
The New Zealand Government says it is focusing on achieving better results for individuals and families in the highest need.
Where it succeeds, there are opportunities to help people fulfil their potential, a chance to break inter-generational cycles of dependency and, in the long term, potential savings for taxpayers.
The Government wants private and public sector organisations operating together to fund and deliver services.
Budget 2015 set aside $28.8 million for four social bond programmes and the first will expand on a small and successful pilot delivering employment services to people with mental health problems.
If the bonds achieve agreed results, the Government will pay back the investors, plus a return, Health Minister Jonathan Coleman says.
Labour health spokeswoman Annette King has launched an expected attack on the process by claiming the Government is using some of the most vulnerable New Zealanders as guinea pigs against official advice and in the absence of international evidence.
She claims a multimillion-dollar mental health initiative, being bank-rolled by private investors, is a disaster in the making.
But is it?
The model being adopted by the Government shifts the financial risk of funding and delivering social services to private sector service providers and investors.
If successful, investors can expect to receive their principal back, plus a return.
Investors are paid only if the measurable outcomes are successfully achieved.
The risk is the focus on receiving their money back, plus a return, will blind investors to the actual goal but that cannot be proved or disproved until the bonds are on issue.
The New Zealand Initiative found there are less than 100 social bonds on issue worldwide and none of them have yet reached maturity.
New Zealand has a history of leading the world in many areas, and this may be one more.
The Government has determined it will continue with public private partnerships (PPPs) for running prisons and building roads.
Taxpayers are reluctant to pay more of their income in tax but yet want better results for their health dollars.
If social bonds free up tax money for more operations for people waiting in pain, that will be a good result.
The public service sector does not have a monopoly on good ideas and good services.
The bond process will mean public agencies working with private investors to find a solution for making mental health services accessible and relevant.
For some people, being supported and encouraged to achieve employment is an important part of their treatment and ongoing care.
Investors with a pure profit motive are unlikely to be interested in such projects but philanthropists and others with a history of social investing are likely to be involved from the start.
These bonds are a ground-breaking way to solve some of New Zealand's social problems and should be welcomed into the marketplace.
