Public service

New Zealand’s governance structure limits ministerial authority, making chief executives accountable to a commissioner instead. This system demands reforms, allowing ministers to appoint leaders for improved accountability and effectiveness.

New Zealand’s government system, where chief executives are appointed by an independent commissioner without ministerial input, hinders effective governance and lacks accountability, unlike practices in other democracies.

New Zealand’s ministers lack control over departments, so my report suggests reforms to improve accountability by allowing ministerial appointments of chief executives, learning from OECD counterparts like Germany and Australia.

New Zealand’s first National Infrastructure Plan revealed poor asset management and accountability despite high spending, highlighting the need for a long-term, informed approach to infrastructure.

At the World Economic Forum, Mark Carney emphasised the need for middle powers to reform their policy-making systems. New Zealand’s recent reforms highlight the challenges of bureaucracy and accountability in achieving lasting change.

The report “Demystifying the State” explores the complexity of the state’s functions, addressing misconceptions and highlighting the need for a better understanding.

Tony Burton’s “Demystifying the State,” challenges the idealised view of government, revealing its human flaws and institutional limitations. He advocates for localism and offers ideas for improvement.

Anthony Albanese wasted no time asserting authority as Australia’s Prime Minister, swiftly replacing key department heads. In contrast, New Zealand’s bureaucratic system poses obstacles to ministerial influence, with a significant rise in public service size, limited ministerial control over appointments, and physical and organizational distance between ministers and departments. This presents a persistent challenge to potential government reforms.