Contracts, consultants and public service cuts

Brendan Horan has revealed a budget
blowout at TPK

This was lost in the Christmas season. From Scoop:

Brendan Horan is concerned that Te Puni Kokiri is massively overspending on contractors and consultants while at the same time lacking the staff to have the capacity to deliver on its core mission. 

“Te Puni Kokori spent over $9.5 million on consultants and contractors in the last financial year. Over 130 businesses, organisations and individuals benefitted from this largesse, holding contracts with a value of nearly $18 million,” said Brendan Horan. 

“At the same time, Te Puni Kokiri’s staff numbers are 15.3% below the minimum needed to deliver the services that are required of them. This is unacceptable at a time when Maori are at the wrong end of the scale in education, in employment, and in achievement.

Every government department contracts for external services. But $9.5 million is excessive. That represents 16% of Te Puni Kokiri's total budget and 28% of its total personnel budget. In 2012 only $4.7 million was allocated to Te Puni Kokiri for "consultant's fees".

Michelle Hippolite, the CEO, explained to RNZ that she thinks Te Puni Kokiri "has the appropriate mix of staff and consultants" while officials told the Maori Affairs Select Committee that the consultant blowout was a result of "holding off from filling 56 jobs while a review of the department was carried out".

I'm not convinced that it's appropriate to leave 56 positions in limbo in any department, least of all a department that provides important administrative services and policy functions to several ministers, gives inter-agency advice and manages a number regional offices. Issues like Whanau Ora and the government's response to Wai 262 have also led to a significant increase in workload. 

Te Puni Kokiri's wanton outsourcing compromises efficiency and strategic capabilities. Existing and former staff have always been dedicated to Maori - and they've always done a good job - but management (appears) to be dragging the chain. Words like "efficiency" and "strategic capabilities" are derisory buzzwords, but they do affect Maori at the end of the line. An inefficient bureaucracy affects the services Maori receive. From Marae development to the Maori potential fund. Whanau Ora to Maori wardens. Why did we let this story escape our attention? 

The problem with Whanau Ora

In another Whanau Ora controversy, Winston Peters has revealed a Palmerston North based provider owes $75,000 to IRD in overdue GST and PAYE tax. The provider, a branch of the Women’s Refuge, also overpaid annual leave. Following an audit report funding was frozen.

This controversy, in conjunction with the others, illustrates serious competency issues in the delivery and monitoring of Whanau Ora. The problems can be attributed to teething issues, but I think that explanation is too simplistic.

Whanau Ora outsources social service funding and delivery. More often than not the government outsources to organisations that do not have a proven track record in delivering and monitoring social services. The Women’s Refuge, for example, is a proven provider when it comes to providing accomodation and support for battered women. However, beyond that service, the Women’s Refuge is untested and inexperienced. I think it is fair to assume no one in the Women’s Refuge has the institutional, administrative and business experience to competently deliver social services beyond what they specialise in.

This was always going to be the gamble with Whanau Ora. There were never enough organisations with the capacity and experience to deliver what the government does or did. There are exceptions, the Waipereira trust is probably the most prominent example, but they are the exception not the rule.

It is an indictment on Te Puni Kokiri that these controversies keep occurring. TPK was, after all, restructured in an attempt to put more focus on Whanau Ora.

I support Whanau Ora in principle. The idea that communities should deliver social services makes sense. The idea that social service delivery should be centralised is also smart. However, the ideas do not seem to be working well in practice. This, I think, can be rectified over time. The government needs to take a more active role in building capability among providers. Any approach otherwise is just negligent.

Budget 2012: What's in for Maori

Well, there isn’t much to report from Budget 2012 – not for Maori at least.

As signalled, tobacco excise tax will increase 10 percent each year for the next four years. On this issue, Bill English acknowledged the work of the Maori Party.

Most significantly, however, the Maori Party has secured $19m for “Maori medium early childhood education providers”, $10m towards Maori trade training, the changes to teacher ratios will not affect Maori immersion schools and $24m was allocated to combat rheumatic fever. As far as cuts go, Maori development funding has been cut and transferred to policy functions, Whanau Ora administration funding has been decreased, as has funding for Maori radio and Maori tourism. Surprisingly, I think, Te Puni Kokiri’s budget has decreased a mere $1m to $60m.

In all, the budget is neither here nor there for the Maori Party. The wins offset the losses, but that cannot be considered a win. The Maori Party needed to secure a big bang win and create a narrative from there. For example, a 50m win for education. The Maori Party could then claim they are protecting Maori education from the government’s agenda, read cuts. Of course, to be fair, the Maori Party have secured significant wins in Maori education, but not enough to leave a lasting impression nor enough to create a sustainable narrative. It was, I think, essential for the Maori Party to distance themselves from what was, on the whole, an austerity budget. However, they are, thanks to only meagre wins, tainted by association.

Having said that, the Maori Party should be applauded for securing what they did, especially considering the government’s approach to the budget. In an environment of cuts, the Maori Party has secured some funding increases and, for all intents and purposes, the Vote Maori Affairs Budget has remained the same.

Before moving on, I should point out the significance of Maori immersion schools avoiding the student/teacher ratio changes. First of all it shows that Hekia Parata has not sold out tino rangatiratanga entirely, secondly it shows that Hekia implicitly acknowledges that higher teacher ratios hurt education:

"Proportionately immersion schools are more successful in raising Maori achievement than mainstream and we do not want to impair that progress"

In other words, higher student to teacher ratios hurt education.

So, in all, the Maori Party have done well considering the circumstances, but not enough to boost their support.

As for cuts, there were a few. For me, it’s not the cuts themselves that worry, it’s where the savings from those cuts were transferred. Maori development funding has suffered and the savings have been transferred to policy advice under Crown/Maori relationships, ministerial servicing and Maori development. Effectively Maori development funding is going towards supporting government ministers so, in other words, the funding is going towards fattening up the Maori bureaucracy (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing but it’s questionable). In all, the policy advice budget comes in at $23m which seems very, very gratuitous. Surely much of that money is better spent on Maori development.

Maori radio has had a minor cut while Maori TV’s budget remains the same – again. Significantly, Te Puni Kokiri’s budget has fallen to $60m – a $1m cut. Of course, this is only what is budgeted, one would expect savings to be made within that budget.

Lastly, the Treaty negotiations budget is $170m of which $66m is to support lending to implement the Ngāti Whatua o Orakei Deed of Settlement and $24m for the administration and implementation of the MCA Act.

In all, that’s the budget for Maori. Nothing much, but enough considering the circumstances I suppose. If the above signals all the Maori Party can achieve in the next two budgets, then their demise becomes more certain.

Maori issues in 2012

Last year the Parliamentary Library released a number of research papers. The papers deal with selected issues from different portfolio areas. I’ve taken a look at the Maori affairs paper, here are some key points:

----------

It is estimated all historic claims will be settled by 2016 (not 2014 which is National’s “aspirational” date). The relativity mechanism in Tainui and Ngai Tahu’s settlements are expected to be triggered this year or next. The government is expected to respond to the WAI262 report, Ko Aotearoa Tenei, this year.

----------

The Maori Economic Development Panel will present their report in July. The panel will produce a Maori economic strategy and action plan.

----------

The implementation of Whanau Ora is expected to continue. TPK is providing ongoing monitoring. As part of the government and the Maori Party’s plans to restructure TPK, a new high level policy unit will be created and, according to my sources, focus on Whanau Ora.

---------- 

The discussion phase of the constitutional review will begin in 2013. The review will consider, among other things, Maori electoral participation, Maori seats in government (local and national) and the role of the treaty within New Zealand’s constitutional framework. For some odd reason the only legal expert on the panel is Professor John Burrows.

More on TPK and the Maori Party

The picture at TPK is becoming a little clearer. Pita Sharples has finally released a statement, a short one at that, expressing his support for staff. Sharples claims:

“How the Ministry manages their fiscal pressures and efficiency dividend is of course an operational matter for management. I expect to be consulted on the Chief Executive’s proposals for how Te Puni Kokiri continues to deliver the most effective services to the public, within the budget they have been allocated,” he said.

Firstly, passing the ball to management is a cop out. But most importantly, Sharples statement is, if one reads between or beyond the lines, a couched endorsement of the cuts. The Maori Party made no secret of their intentions to reform TPK, but I don’t think anyone knew their intentions were to cut jobs.

Winston Peters continues to hammer away at the Maori Party. He accuses the party of gutting TPK as a trade off for increased funding for Whanau Ora. Parekura Horomia also highlights the inadequacy of the Maori Party’s “at the table” argument. Horomia notes that as a Minister outside of Cabinet Sharples was unable to fight for the survival of TPK when Cabinet, or the appropriate Cabinet Committee, was thrashing out the details. However, that logic assumes the Maori Party actually wanted restructuring at TPK to be neutral, meaning no cuts, no increases, just a reshuffle. I tend to think the Maori Party supported cuts all along.

The Maori Party isn’t attacking National’s decision to impose cuts, nor is the party publicly lobbying for cuts to be deferred or cancelled. Instead, the party has remained silent, bar Sharples one statement expressing support for people who are about to lose their jobs. It appears the Maori Party wanted this, they just don’t want to wear the consequences. Hence Sharples attempt to deflect this as an operational matter.

What support the Maori Party clawed back with their threat to leave National has now evaporated. I struggle to see how the party has any future post-2014.

Te Puni Kokiri to face cuts (updated)

Hone Harawira has revealed that Te Puni Kokiri, the Ministry of Maori Development, is in line for massive cuts:

The restructure of TPK is said to include:
• Major redundancies
• Closure of many branch offices
• Reducing TPK’s role to social issues (education, employment and housing)
• The removal of major responsibilities (economic development, Matauranga Maori including WAI 262, Marae Development, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights, Te Reo Maori, Broadcasting, Land and Resource Development, and Whanau Ora)

This doesn’t come as a surprise. Wellington rumour has had it that TPK was always in the government’s sights, it was just a matter of when.

TPK advises the government, including other government agencies, on all issues Maori. From Maori economic development to Maori social well being. TPK has a $60m budget, employs over 300 staff and operates, from my count, 21 offices including a head office in Wellington. Media reports so far have indicated that 50 jobs will go. This comes on top of 60 redundancies and an $8m funding cut in the last three years.

The Maori Party signalled their intentions to restructure TPK prior to the election. This was consistent with their intentions pre-2008, but upon taking office Pita Sharples backed down and assured TPK employees that there would be no cuts. I would have imagined the Maori Party’s idea of restructuring differed radically from National’s understanding of the word. The Maori Party would be thinking reshuffle, but National would be thinking redundancies. However, judging from the Maori Party's silence on redundancies one can assume that they support the cuts.

In my opinion, TPK probably doesn't need to be restructered. The Ministry has one of the widest briefs of any department, but is, relatively speaking, small in terms of staff numbers and budget. As above, TPK has already downsized significantly, but its workload has increased. In 2010 TPK was tasked with planning, implementing and evaluating the Maori response to the Canterbury earthquake. That same year TPK was given responsibility for developing, implementing and evaluating Whanau Ora.

Sure, TPK has come under fire in the past and rightly so. For example, in 2010 Leith Comer, the CEO of TPK, advised staff not to work so hard following their, in my opinion, excellent work in the wake of the Canterbury earthquake. However, that same year TPK, apparently, rated highly in performance reviews. This contradicts information from TVNZ that TPK was judged the worst performing ministry in an independent survey.

If the government decides to go ahead with a demolition job on TPK the quality of advice Ministers and government agencies receive will be poor to pathetic. The DPMC doesn’t have the in-house capabilities to properly and expertly advise Ministers on Maori issues. No other government agency has the in-house capabilities either. The result will be a government that fumbles Maori issues.

Ordinary Maori will also be hit. Many Maori will lose their jobs if, or when, regional offices are closed. Maori trying to access TPK services, like business grants and advice, will have to deal with a decreased service.

Once again Hone Harawira is on top of this. He's slammed the Maori Party and National. He's taken the high road while the Maori Party is left searching for an appropriate response. Like their response to the s9 controversy, they've found themselves on the back foot. On Closeup last night Pita Sharples didn't show, instead Leith Comer did. Actually, Sharples refused to front any media yesterday. It looks like he's running from this. The same is true today, Winston Peters and Hone Harawira fronted Morning Report and poured acid on the Maori Party and National. Labour also released a statement criticising the cuts.

Hone Harawira, Annette Sykes and even Winston Peters are landing blow after blow on the Maori Party. It's almost cruel to watch, then again they brought it upon themselves.

Come Waitangi day, the government is going to find itself in a tight spot with Maori. S9 was a big issue for Maori and cuts at TPK will be another kick in the guts. Expect a lot of noise come Monday.

On the Maori Party deal with National

Despite taking a hit, the Maori Party has signed up for another three years with National. The two parties have signed a confidence and supply agreement as well as a new relationship accord. The agreement differs from the last in that the Maori Party can vote on an issue by issue basis (except on matters of confidence and supply, for example the budget). Obviously, this gives the Maori Party room to oppose asset sales. However, as much as the Maori Party would like to distance themselves from asset sales, and the government’s larger agenda for that matter, the party is still going to be tainted by association.

The agreement includes the establishment of a ministerial committee on poverty, chaired by Bill English and deputy chaired by Tariana Turia. With English at the helm I doubt the government will dismiss the committee in the same way Act’s economic taskforce was ignored last term. The Maori Party needs to reclaim Maori poverty from Mana (Mana owned the issue last term) and bust the perception that they favour the symbolic over the substantive. Having said that, with the government committed to returning to surplus the next three budgets will probably be zero sum. With that in mind the committee will just be a flash vehicle for reshuffled funding and, as a result, just another symbolic win for the Maori Party.

The agreement also includes an undertaking to shift the focus of Te Puni Kokiri (TPK) towards jobs, education and housing. Again, an attempt at making substantive gains, however, again, the win is weak. It is difficult for many Maori, if not most, to connect changes in TPK to real world gains. I think this particular policy is more about protecting TPK. TPK was, I think, first in line for cuts this term. However, with an increased and broadened focus I doubt the government can cut staff and funding without crippling the agency and undermining the Maori Party. Then again, when has that ever stopped them.

The big announcement is the retention and expansion of whanau ora – the Maori Party’s trophy policy. A stand alone commissioning agency, whatever the hell that is, will be established and funding for rheumatic fever will be doubled to $24m, 20,000 more low income homes will be insulated and work will progress on iwi providing social housing. The Maori Party’s re-election strategy revolved around whanau ora so no surprise to see the above. The rheumatic fever funding is, in my opinion, a huge win for the Maori Party. For example, in Tai Tokerau rheumatic fever was the dominant health issue and many voters were calling on their MP, Hone Harawira, to address the problem. Of course, Hone was and is in no position to do so – he actually had to point to work done when he was a member of the Maori Party thus undermining his decision to split from the party. The home insulation win is neither here nor there. Iwi providing social housing is not new, but with government backing we should see proliferation.

Overall, a good deal for the Maori Party. The party is free to oppose the government on all issues except confidence and supply. This should, in theory, lead to a more independent image this term. In other words, it’ll be hard to accuse the Maori Party of being the National Party’s proxies in the Maori electorates. In terms of policy gains, I’d give the Maori Party 6/10. Nothing to set the world on fire, but nothing to complain about either. The challenge for the Maori Party will be to distance themselves from National’s agenda and destroy the perceptions created last term. For example, the perception (or reality some say) that the Maori Party sold Maori down the drain with the MCA Act, ETS, GST, ACC changes, the 90 day law and so on while only winning symbolic gains like the TRT flag over the harbour bridge. The symbol over substance argument.  

The week in Maori politics (updated)

It was slow going in Maori politics this week. Below I’ve summarised and commented on the main events.


Monday: 

News on Monday was dominated by the Mana Movement’s campaign launch at a Marae in South Auckland. In a quite deliberate and symbolic move the launch was held on Guy Fawkes day. There wasn’t really anything radical or new to come out of the day.

Native Affairs Kowhiri 11 Waiariki debate was held on Monday night. Te Ururoa Flavell (Maori Party), Annette Sykes (Mana) and Louis Te Kani (Labour) went head to head on issues like family violence and a motorway that will cut through the Puarenga Stream. Interestingly, Louis Te Kani put his head out and said, should he win, he will resign if the motorway goes ahead. In contrast, Labour’s Steve Chadwick (who was at the debate) supports the motorway (she didn’t point that out at the debate though of course). I called the debate for Annette and sparked heated debate with many commenters calling it for Te Ururoa and some even expressing support for Louis Te Kani.

A Te Karere Digi-poll surveying the Tamaki Makaurau electorate was released on Monday and showed Pita Sharples enjoys a comfortable lead over Labour’s Shane Jones and Mana’s Kereama Pene. This wasn’t in itself a surprise, but the extent of Pita’s support was. The poll indicated Pita enjoys a clear majority (58% support).


Tuesday: 

Tuesday was an empty day. The highlight was probably Kereama Pene saying Mana will not sit down with Kupapa. This we already know, but it was fascinating to see Pene invoke that sort of language. In fact, it was fascinating to see him speak to media at all. I would have thought that Matt McCarten would have tied a tight leash to him.


Wednesday: 

Another slow day. The only highlight was the Ikaroa-Rawhiti debate between Parekura Horomia (Labour), Na Raihania (Maori Party) and Tawhai McClutchie (Mana). I called the debate for Parekura, but I think had Na not endorsed National Standards the debate could have easily gone his way. Parekura has done his campaign no disservice and will probably cruise to victory.


Thursday: 

A very busy day as far as the Maori Party was concerned. The party released their education policy which called for universal access to Te Reo Maori in schools. A great policy. If Maori, or non-Maori too, want to learn te reo then it should be available as a subject at all schools – or at the very least at all state schools. Te Reo Maori is an official language, an integral part of New Zealand society and giving effect to te reo is recognising the Crown’s obligation under the Treaty to actively protect Maori taonga.

Tariana Turia also called for a review of Te Puni Kokiri. I’m not sure if this is needed, but it sounds reasonable. What bad can come of it? None in my mind.


Friday: 

In the Herald I stick it to Labour for failing to enter or influence Maori political discourse. Labour is leaving Mana and the Maori Party to direct Maori political discourse and, as a result, allowing the two parties an opportunity to eat in to one of Labour's traditional support bases i.e. Maori voters. I need to eat some of my words though because what does Goff go and do – he makes a headline at Waatea News. Let’s hope to see some follow up from Labour.

Hone Harawira participates in a live chat on Stuff.co.nz. Hone confirms he will never work with National and provides a few insightful one-liners like "Charities exist where governments fail".
The Maori Party policy on making te reo universally available in schools still has legs.