OLIVER HARTWICH: Embed, align, continue, refresh
The cover of MBIE’s new Workforce Diversity Action Plan shows nine staff holding signs reading “I belong” in several languages. Inside, it declares itself “People-centred | Performance-driven | Evidence-informed”.
Treasury’s plan appeared a few weeks after MBIE’s. Both are organised around the same three focus areas. Both culminate in the same heading “Apply the merit principle comprehensively”.
That emphasis is no accident. The coalition Government, unlike its predecessor, has removed diversity and inclusion requirements from the Public Service Act and entrenched merit-based appointments. The new vocabulary reflects that message, but the measures remain the same.
At least five strategies guide MBIE’s plan. They range from Kia Kotahi Mai on inclusion and belonging to Whāinga Amorangi on Māori-Crown relations. Staff complete modules on unconscious bias, bullying and the rainbow community. Progress feeds into quarterly dashboards.
Treasury’s catalogue runs from its He Ara Waiora tool kit and an Accentuated Programme for ethnically diverse women to guest speakers on menopause, a drop-in group for staff with neurodivergent family and its Rainbow Network’s annual Bake Sale.
Most planned actions merely extend existing work. The verbs give it away: embed, align, integrate, continue, refresh.
Treasury reports that its pay gaps for the same or similar roles are “negligible or nil” after concerted effort. That is a real achievement. Fairness demands equal pay for equal work, and Treasury has delivered it.
MBIE reaches a similar conclusion, attributing its remaining pay gaps to “workforce and progression patterns rather than unequal pay for the same roles”. On the agencies’ own analysis, the headline gaps measure differences in workforce composition, not discrimination.
And so, both plans leave me puzzled.
Are the agencies saying they still have a problem to fix? MBIE invokes “barriers to advancement” without naming one. Treasury cites “systemic factors” it admits it does not yet understand.
Are they doing anything differently from a few years ago? The refreshed headings suggest change, but the same old programmes suggest otherwise.
And how does any of it help the departments fulfil their missions? MBIE exists to support economic growth, and Treasury advises the Government on it. Treasury’s own performance review rates its economic advice “weak”, its other core functions merely “developing”.
After years of economic stagnation, neither department is short of core work. Yet their plans are documents about themselves: their strategies, networks, modules and dashboards.
On my reading, neither department has any remaining diversity deficiencies. Which is fantastic, of course.
But it should also eliminate any need to produce more of these action plans.
Dr Oliver Hartwich is Executive Director of the New Zealand Initiative
“Treasury’s own performance review rates its economic advice “weak”, its other core functions merely “developing”.”
I find that quite distressing. There used to be a time when Treasury was held up to be the ‘gold standard’ for economic advice, and could be relied upon for robust cost benefit analysis and business case review. If our brightest economists aren’t being attracted to Treasury as a career, it simply means that future politicians’ pie in the sky fantasies won’t get properly challenged.
They're probably consulting with (at great cost) a recent former PM on how to put together a meaningless word salad meaning nothing.
I heard via the news tonight that the Greens propose an annual payment of taxpayer’s money to marae’s around the country totalling…take a breath… $2.4B.
That is $2,400 million.
My wife looked at me and asked why I was shaking my head so? It’s bad for my neck apparently.
I said I’d claim ACC and blame the Greens if it turned into an issue - inexplicably she wasn’t amused.
What is needed is a panel of actual experts (e.g., people like Elon Musk) to establish how we can massively cut bureaucrat head count through the implementation of AI and then rapid roll out of the solution. At least half of these paper shufflers need to go and then AI needs to be used to find the next level of efficiency gains (e.g., remove reports no one reads, have the government automatically publish certain data rather than wait for OIA requests, and streamline the red tape). We the people can no longer afford the current level of bureaucracy.
Don't you dare suggest erasing MBIE. They include the lovely people who pay my superannuation and check up on me every 6 months to see if I am still alive!!