Andersen Ginny; Mallard TrevorGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Mr Speaker I thank you very much for having the opportunity to speak on this bill. It's great too as a former public servant to be able to see great improvement in an area where there's always room for more improvement. It's good to see here a bill that really enables the Public Service to have far more flexibility. Before I move on I'd just like to note that the Te Kao dairy does the biggest ice creams in New Zealand and big shout-out to upstairs. Thank you very much for coming today. In terms of funding it's really good to see an alignment between what the Minister of Finance and what the Minister of State Services are talking about because we start to see how this Government is building a picture of where those pieces join together to make not just the Public Service able to operate more fluidly but to enable the way that they are delivered funding and the way that funding reaches New Zealand to be more closely aligned. That has been a fundamental blockage in the system in the past. It was only this morning that we heard in the Justice Committee in terms of the reviews there how there's been some really significant improvements in terms of family violence with all of those agencies that had been funded under the same budget that were able to work together with shared goals and shared outcomes and to be able to deliver this in a way where they are all able to take recognition and be held accountable through that process. So that's a new process as a result of the most recent Budgets and it's enabling better services to be delivered to New Zealanders. I'd like to use an example and this is no criticism of anyone in particular but it is to show how what we saw this morning in the Justice Committee has changed from previous practices. In terms of the establishment of something like the Gang Intelligence Centre where we had eight different agencies all with their different hats on all with their different funding all with their different priorities who were trying to deliver outcomes it was incredibly frustrating because from the ideas that were happening in Wellington to the practicalities that were delivered to New Zealanders there was a huge gap. There was a problem and so much of public servants' time and consultants' time can be wasted in terms of trying to argue where that alignment sits. So being able to have one common goal in how that funding is lined up really stops those examples that we have seen time and time again in the New Zealand Public Service of not being clearly aligned in terms of what the outcomes are. Each of those different entities had their own accountabilities in the past. They had their own requirements and their own different ways of thinking to be frank. So by aligning those from the outset provides not just better quality policy advice but also better deliverables when you translate from policy from the idea into implementation and practice. And I think that saves money all round as well for New Zealanders. A good idea doesn't always perfectly translate into a good practice and the value of increasing the emphasis on collaboration which is what this bill does exactly—what that does is it enables those parts of Government that do the policy development and those parts of Government that do the implementation to talk up front. As a former employee of two public services both the Office of Treaty Settlements and New Zealand Police to see the benefits upfront of policy and operations being side by side and discussing how an idea will hit the road how that idea will practically be implemented can save the taxpayer so much money and can save New Zealanders wasted time in having to fill out forms or do things unnecessarily. There are huge benefits that lie in what this bill sets out to enable delivery to people and a better use of Government funds to be set from the outright and I'm personally really excited to see where that can take us. While it's great to see agreement from both sides of the House—and I'm pleased to always see that particularly in an area that I am passionate about in an area that holds so much benefit for how we'll be operating in the future—it's been interesting to note the little points of difference we've heard today in this debate so far. One was first of all the Hon Dr Nick Smith who spoke about the most important thing of the Public Service being that I'm getting value for money; making sure that they're not getting too much pay if they're going from one agency to the other; or making sure we're getting everybody working as hard as they possibly can and not having a Gliding On situation." whereas I beg to differ. I would see the best value in our Public Service being really good quality advice and its people who have the confidence and the ability to work in an apolitical way in a way that gives them the time and the research the knowledge—all of those things that put together make a really good piece of advice that can inform ministerial decisions in the best way possible. By enabling that collaboration that contest of ideas by enabling that process to happen in the best possible way that puts us ahead of the world in terms of the quality of our Public Service. And that's something that I'm incredibly proud of having here in New Zealand. So I would say that the real value of our Public Service is the top-quality advice that we get and it's important to continue to improve how we do that.I'd just like to note too that it's really encouraging on that note to see some of those really fundamental values that the Public Service has always known now being sort of written in. So those areas of political neutrality free and frank advice and merit-based appointments are to be embedded into the new Act. I am really encouraged by seeing how well that goes.In terms of also getting back to that robustness of advice the best possible way is to enable officials no matter where they're from to be able to do that. We have had many examples—and I'll say yes they're from both sides of the House—where what we've seen is an outcome delivered already to officials. I can remember one in particular around crushing cars where we were told straightaway to go away and do that and you worked backwards. So I have to say developing a regulatory impact statement that references German reality TV isn't a good practice. It's better-off to have some really good research to determine what a problem is what other agencies are doing already how the problem is working and what the best course forward is. So it's having a far more transparent Public Service; having one that's more able to be apolitical to do the work to have that area that produces better quality policies produces better quality laws and produces better quality outcomes for New Zealand. It makes us proud to be a Government to be an institution in New Zealand that can hold its head up and say "We did a good job here. We understood this problem. We analysed this problem. We identified the risks. We identified the opportunities. And we made these decisions based upon good quality advice." That is the real strength that the Public Service delivers and this piece of legislation enables those strengths to go forward even more. The last point I'd like to make is the fantastic piece in this bill that particularly acknowledges the role of Māori and our obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. This has been previously silent in Acts and it's really interesting when you get your statements of intent from all your departments you'll see right up front that "We operate under the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi". I'm always interested to ask "How do you do that? How do you do that on a daily basis? How does that look in your staffroom or in your practices or in your policy work?" And you always get in Cabinet papers a statement that you've complied with the Treaty of Waitangi. But I'm always a little bit unsure of how that practically happens. So by having a State Services Act having a piece of equipment like this in legislation to put it really clearly that there is an obligation in the Crown-Māori relationship—and it makes chief executives operate as a good employer in policy recognising the aims and the aspirations of Māori the employment requirements of Māori and the need for greater involvement of Māori in the Public Service in their decision-making process—that it's inclusive and you haven't got people making decisions for other groups. This bill puts it right by explicitly recognising the role of the Public Service in supporting the Crown and its relationship with Māori under the Treaty of Waitangi. And in order to do this Public Service leaders will be held responsible for developing and maintaining the capability of the Public Service to engage with Māori and to understand Māori perspectives. The commissioner in development with the implementation of leadership strategy for the Public Service must also recognise the good employment requirements relating to Māori. So under the current Act each department has previously had a narrow focus on its own identity a narrow focus on its own goals. And what this enables is a greater platform for working together for better outcomes for New Zealand for better outcomes for our public servants to be able to use—SPEAKER: Order! The member's time has expired.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Governance and Administration Committee."