Erosion of respect for public servants lamentable

Amongst David Benson-Pope’s ‘Freudian slips’ and denials about the Setchell affair, the on-going colourful media coverage and Helen Clark’s interesting decision to continue to back a Minister with such a shaky reputation, there is a very important issue that needs to be carefully examined – the treatment of public servants.

New Zealand has a small population where most people know each other, and Wellington is an even more intimate setting. Husbands and wives, partners, family members and friends can all be working for ‘the opposition’. Therefore, the nature of public service means it’s unlikely that anyone will not have even a smidgen of a conflict of interest.

The long-standing practice that our public sector is apolitical serves the country well. It is sad that someone has to lose their job because of their relationship. If a person is employed, you think that would be because they were best for the role, not because of any political leanings.

Yes, the Setchell affair has attracted rigorous debate because what happened to her should not happen to any public servant. It is not right for a Minister, or his office, to put pressure on a chief executive to get rid of someone.

Over recent years, there has been a change in how our public servants are viewed. In the Labour Government’s eyes, they’ve gone from being loyal employees able to work under any government, to employees who should fit in with whatever the political agenda of the day is. This has an unfortunate flow-on effect to management who demand loyalty.

Take, for example, ACC’s decision to get rid of its anonymous feedback forum ‘Reality Check’ for its staff, where they could ask any question about ACC, staff and management. This anonymous forum has been replaced with a phone-in line and face-to-face interviews. Any shred of anonymity has gone.

ACC Minister Ruth Dyson says Reality Check went because they wanted ‘more diverse and efficient ways' of capturing staff feedback and that the 'questions submitted could be best answered through existing management structures'.

Frustrated staff will hardly dare to ask hard questions of their seniors if they’re sitting across the room from them or are on the other end of the phone. Anyway, wasn’t the point of Reality Check to enable their staff to ask frank questions of their seniors?

This is nothing more than ACC wanting its staff to tow the line– and it doesn’t stop there. I have heard that ACC has told its staff not to raise any problems they have with the new multimillion-dollar computer system EOS because that’s perceived as being negative.

There are major problems within ACC. Any levy-payer, claimant or staff member will tell you this. If those at the coal face cannot raise queries or problems in a safe manner, without fear of the consequences, then critical issues simply won’t be raised.

This erosion of respect has also revealed itself in more subtle ways.

Earlier this year, due to concerns from our Sikh communities about several incidents involving Sikhs who had been flying domestically, I facilitated a meeting between them and the airline involved, and ensured they then went on to make a submission on the Aviation Security Legislation Bill. I am in the process of setting up another meeting between the community and Aviation Security Authority.

The Sikh representatives have had their opinions heard and included in the select committee report on the bill, and have offered their services to the airline involved for staff training purposes. It has been a win-win for all involved.

The results of these meetings were published in community newspapers. The Office of Ethnic Affairs obviously felt they had to defend their Minister in a positive light and responded with a very long letter outlining their work in this area. Why did they feel the need to respond so strongly and politically?

Our public servants should be able to carry out their jobs without being fearful of what they say or do, who their family or partners work for, or without having to feel the need to be political and to be seen to be doing their job.

A good public servant knows this – it’s the Labour-led Government that doesn’t.

Pansy Wong

www.pansywong.co.nz
www.national.org.nz
Join the conversation www.johnkey.co.nz

ENDS

© Scoop Media