According to Nicola Willis, “Despite the Government currently investing more than $70 billion every year into social services, we are not seeing the outcomes we want for all New Zealanders... So we’re taking a different approach. We want to look beyond good intentions in our policy-making and use hard evidence to invest in what works. Our new approach builds on better social science evidence and advances in technology."
That sounds promising. A break with the old.
Except the SIA's first Annual Report is as cloyingly correct as the usual run-of-the-mill regurgitation issued by public agencies.
Example 1:
"We are committed to creating a high-performing workplace where everyone feels valued, respected, and can bring their whole selves to work."
This is silly, but fashionable, psychobabble. Clearly the approach isn't working anyway. Because in an environment also , "... committed to building an inclusive, equitable workplace and a workforce that reflects the growing diversity of Aotearoa New Zealand" 70 percent of the staff are women and 80 percent are European.
That's not very diverse or inclusive. Others didn't even want to bring a bit of themselves, let alone their whole selves.
Example 2:
"Te Aho Kura is our bespoke Māori Cultural Capability Plan ...Te Aho Kura primarily focuses on building employee knowledge and capability in te reo Māori, New Zealand History/Treaty of Waitangi, Tikanga/Kawa, Engagement with Māori, and how we apply these to our work."
On one hand the aim is "everyone feels valued, respected". On the other, the agency "focuses on building employee knowledge and capability in te reo Māori." Now call me picky but I sense some mixed messaging going on here. Bring your whole self by all means, just make sure it conforms to our values, which are by the way:
Example 3:
Click to view - No translation available.
Example 4:
"We support our people to have a meaningful work/life balance, to proactively look after their physical and mental wellbeing ... As well as health and safety representatives, SIA has an active health and safety committee that meets every six weeks to consider a range of health, safety and wellbeing issues that matter to our people."
Our people? The concern of the Social Investment Agency should surely be 'other' people. The vulnerable they are tasked with helping.
There's the inevitable screeds about commitment to Treaty Settlements and identifying/reducing emissions (which they could have put a sizeable dent in by purging this report of claptrap.)
Yes, I know it is early days. The agency is in its infancy. But if you thought the public service was going to look or behave any differently under a National government, you will be disappointed.
Indications are that the propagandist public service is just marking time till a left wing administration is restored.
Lindsay Mitchell is a welfare commentator who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced
Example 1:
"We are committed to creating a high-performing workplace where everyone feels valued, respected, and can bring their whole selves to work."
This is silly, but fashionable, psychobabble. Clearly the approach isn't working anyway. Because in an environment also , "... committed to building an inclusive, equitable workplace and a workforce that reflects the growing diversity of Aotearoa New Zealand" 70 percent of the staff are women and 80 percent are European.
That's not very diverse or inclusive. Others didn't even want to bring a bit of themselves, let alone their whole selves.
Example 2:
"Te Aho Kura is our bespoke Māori Cultural Capability Plan ...Te Aho Kura primarily focuses on building employee knowledge and capability in te reo Māori, New Zealand History/Treaty of Waitangi, Tikanga/Kawa, Engagement with Māori, and how we apply these to our work."
On one hand the aim is "everyone feels valued, respected". On the other, the agency "focuses on building employee knowledge and capability in te reo Māori." Now call me picky but I sense some mixed messaging going on here. Bring your whole self by all means, just make sure it conforms to our values, which are by the way:
Example 3:
Click to view - No translation available.
Example 4:
"We support our people to have a meaningful work/life balance, to proactively look after their physical and mental wellbeing ... As well as health and safety representatives, SIA has an active health and safety committee that meets every six weeks to consider a range of health, safety and wellbeing issues that matter to our people."
Our people? The concern of the Social Investment Agency should surely be 'other' people. The vulnerable they are tasked with helping.
There's the inevitable screeds about commitment to Treaty Settlements and identifying/reducing emissions (which they could have put a sizeable dent in by purging this report of claptrap.)
Yes, I know it is early days. The agency is in its infancy. But if you thought the public service was going to look or behave any differently under a National government, you will be disappointed.
Indications are that the propagandist public service is just marking time till a left wing administration is restored.
Lindsay Mitchell is a welfare commentator who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced
7 comments:
A major Willis/Upston/Coster deal. A major nail in National's coffin.
NZ is not suffering from ideologues, its suffering at the hands of tax thieves.
Helen Clark, Jacinda Ardern, and now Nicola Willis shoveled billions of our tax money into nonsense organisations for which we receive no benefit including: criminal gangs, kapa haka groups, and "convicted with record fines" drug companies!
So Mr Luxon, you taunted Hipkins about our $66b he "spent" on covid, how about finding out where all our money ended up then returning it?
Or will we add the name Chris Luxon to the shameful list of kiwi battler robbing thieves above?
Mumbo jumbo
Beautifully written piece!! I agree 100%
With a focus on climate issues; the Treaty; and a nod to stone age belief systems from a culture that had limited civility and no recognised welfare, it's all a sure-fire pathway to success. The right leader has been appointed - just consider the 'success' stats in his last role? And like charity, welfare begins at home - so it's a good to see the kamahi are also being well looked after.
As for productivity, just look at the empire building in progress.
Did any of us think Coster was the right man for this job? The chances of success were slashed from the outset. Such a shame as the actual concept is pretty interesting.
Utter waste of time and money. What are the outcomes? What evaluation has been reported? Did I miss something? What have they invested in and what did it cost and how much $ value did we get?
MC
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.