Headline vs reality
June 26th, 2010 at 9:56 am by David FarrarThe headline:
Twittering public servants waste work of four
Public servants spend at least 8482 hours a year on Twitter, a Dominion Post investigation suggests – the equivalent of a year’s work for four full-time staff.
Later in the article we find:
Of those departments allowing Twitter access, most reported monthly use of five to 10 minutes per staffer.
So an average of 15 to 30 seconds a day. Jesus Christ – how does this qualify to be a story. I wish media would report news more rather than invent it.
Related posts:
- Headline vs Reality
- Conversation Transcript
- Headline of the Day
- Was Tamaki going to announce he is the son of God?
June 26th, 2010 at 10:10 am
How is Jesus involved, exactly?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:14 am
The scary reality must then be a Soviet Union sized pool of public servants.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:14 am
just shows how many public ‘servants’ we have!
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:24 am
@ Lucia – perhaps DPF is unwittingly acknowledging Jesus’ divinity
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:33 am
Yes, I believe DPF was asking Jesus for guidance in this matter.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:34 am
Shane & Caleb: Assuming that there are public services that need to be done, in areas such as health, education, defense, etc., what number of public servants do you imagine marks the boundary between minimally sufficient and “one too many”?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:42 am
Is this going to be the “Religious Discussion Thread” for the weekend?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:47 am
Holy Moses Don, don’t give them oxygen!
How many public servants would be saved if no one prayed at work?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 11:01 am
If public servants didn’t stop to say “good morning” to their colleagues as they arrived at the start of the day then we’d save 7 full time staff.
If we installed special low-friction carpet in government offices then public servants would be able to walk from desk to desk quicker and we’d save 16 full time staff.
If government documents were printed in smaller font then public servants wouldn’t spend so much time turning pages and we’d save a whopping 22 full time staff.
If we installed facial recognition systems in the lobby of all government buildings then we’d be able to boot government computers as soon as their user arrived in the building and the computers would be ready for use when their user sat down. That would save 38 full time staff, or 42 full time staff if special high speed lifts were installed.
If we trained public servants to talk faster, use acronyms to represent commonly used phrases, and use “1″ and “0″ instead of the verbal words “Yes” and “No” then government meetings would be shortened by 2 minutes per half hour and we would save 706 full time staff. Instead of shrinking the size of the public service, we might want to transfer the 706 to Waiouru, give them weapons, and stand up a new infantry battalion.
I am sure the Dominion Post would welcome any other examples of blatant public service waste.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 11:01 am
Twitter access proved quite useful in Iran a year ago. This story is just one gossip source griping about another gossip source.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 11:59 am
they spend more time in the toilet or making cups of coffee than they do on twitter. Should we add that time up and report on it?!
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Brian, the scope of state monopolies on services is something that is raising interest all over the world. Particularly places like, oh, I don’t know, Greece?
Fortunately, we are only borrowing a paltry $billion a month. That is ON TOP of that which we are already paying.
She be right.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:03 pm
I wish media would report news more rather than invent it.
Maybe they’ve read too many of your posts and are following your example?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Shane, you conspicuously didn’t answer the question. I have no issue with a sensible scrutiny of the cost of our public service, but I think you should back up your allegations about a “Soviet Union sized pool of public servants”. How many have we got? How many should we have? Which present functions of the public service should cease to be performed? (There are probably many candidate jobs for this, but on the other hand I believe many of our departments are under-resourced for what is expected of them). How about an answer not based on slogans.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
brian – half.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
brian is a public servant.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
your fired brian.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:29 pm
Gee thanks Caleb … see you in the employment court
Vote:(In case you think you were joking, I am a university lecturer, but since we don’t fall under the SSC I don’t think we are counted in the 38,859 of the present cap)
June 26th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
OK Dime, for your next assignment, identify which half. What functions shall we cease to do?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
“How about an answer not based on slogans.”
Whatever we had in 1901. That would be fine for a start.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Red, population in 1901 was 1.2 million. We now have 4.3 million people and a vastly more complex society than we had then. I am aware of your desire for the minimal possible amount of government (and even have a grudging respect for it) but there are certain practicalities to be dealt with that I doubt the then civil service could even begin to manage.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
i have no problem with the numbers, provided they are efficient and essential.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Then we don’t disagree at all. However, I suspect that the people who love to hate the public service expect their employees to do more for less than their private sector counterparts. If you want them to be as good as the private sector, you get them from the same pool of talent, and need to treat them as well, and give them as much slack.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Here goes redbaiter again, once more proving the intellectual bankruptcy of his position.
Red, just what is so magical about 1901? Why not 1860, 1912, 1956 or any other year you care to pluck from your arse?
Just like his great hero Rodney “You can dance but you can’t” Hide, Red is full of opinions but lacks the rigour to back them with facts.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
^^ here goes Paul P again.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Very quickly.
Relocate government call centers and processing centers to the Philippines. If you are a public servant and don’t actually phsycally meet with the public your job should probably be in the Philippines.
Benchmark public service wages to similar jobs in the private sector then cap them at at 80% of the private sector. Public sector employees work for the love of govt after all.
Close down Dept of woman, maori, Pacific Islands. That would be a start.
Invest in hologram technology to lose 80% of university lectures. Sell 70% of university buildings then relocate the rest in the countryside. Reclaim land if necessary.
Stop government funding of all NGOs & charities.
Start selling SOEs and other assets.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
“but there are certain practicalities to be dealt with that I doubt the then civil service could even begin to manage.”
Really? Well Brian, you have just put the onus upon yourself to say why what we had in NZ in 1901 is insufficient for what we have today. Subjective phrases like “vastly more complex” don’t cut it I’m afraid. Everyone still has only two arms two legs and a head.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Govt translates policy into action. There’s a great deal of detail. The argument is really at the borderline between a commercial operation and a govt one and the extent to which commercial principles are applied whenever they are in fact appropriate and they not always are. For example in Justice you could hear cases in a seconds and make verdicts and sentence right there and then, no more remand for sentence crap. Next. But how would that work from a social comfort side of things? That’s an example of something that is legitimate to factor in. Another example of a factor is security.
An example of something that is on the borderline is water privatisation. Personally I don’t see that MetroWater ever did anything that wasn’t already happening anyway when it was run by the ARC or ACC? – can’t recall. Anyway, no service improvement, price increases through the roof. Where’s the gain in that, I ask? But some argue it’s a neaty idea. Are you one of them, RB?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:08 pm
“Are you one of them, RB?”
I don’t see why anyone would regard water as different to any other commodity. (Nobody with the ability to think logically that is.) Once you say the government should provide this service, you open the door to someone else to say it should provide that service. You have to be consistent.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:09 pm
Yes it is pointless beat-up. There are almost certainly staff who are specifically instructed to spend hours a day on Twitter finding out what is being said about government departments and mp’s. It is surprising it is only 4 full timers for a year.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
All I’m saying is, if you look at the real implementation of privitisation in Auckland, some 10 years down the track, what do you see?
What you see is, no service improvement, and price increases through the roof. It’s a fact, not arguable, quite self-evident. Can anyone who has lived in Auckland since MetroWater came in, dispute that with an example of how privitisation has improved their water service? Possibly there are one or two, there’d have to be, wouldn’t there.
But for most of us Aucklanders, nothing has changed, except our rates bill has been split and the resultant combination seems rathermore expensive than it used to, even when you take normal increases into account.
In other words, privitisation is a failure, for water, in our biggest city, and it’s had 10 years to prove itself. It’s clearly obvious that when it was privatised, no massive bolt of commercial reality flashed through MetroWater’s anatomy, awakening and energising the super-efficient beast that was to slay the dragons of inefficiency and waste. No, that didn’t happen.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:22 pm
The reason why it hasn’t worked is because their product delivery has to be made via huge static infrastructure and that’s their entire capital base. The only thing you can do with it is to gradually replace it with more durable materials so you don’t have to spend so much over time. That’s it, for water. No alternative. Until DARPA invents the matter-transfer machine.
Therefore your return on capital is like a crippled snail with arthritis, trying to climb a steep leaf.
That’s why privitisation can’t work. There’s nothing it can do to improve the situation. So it shouldn’t happen, for water.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
“No, that didn’t happen.”
Of course not. NZ is basically a state controlled country in economic terms only a few degrees away from the now defunct Soviet Union. No private company will function effectively in such a damaged economic environment.
This extent of this damage does not stop at economics either, it goes right up through business policy and even to the thinking abilities of the staff and management. Thanks to the left, who put political power above everything, NZ (even in the commercial sector) is a fucked country full of lame brained fuck heads, and nothing will ever work properly here until that changes.
Think about why you can buy petrol so relatively cheaply and efficiently. Because the business model is largely free of input from socialist morons.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Reid, you don’t know that. You are assuming that the price would not have escalated under the old arrangement. Unlikely I suggest.
RB said: Well Brian, you have just put the onus upon yourself to say why what we had in NZ in 1901 is insufficient for what we have today. Subjective phrases like “vastly more complex” don’t cut it I’m afraid. Everyone still has only two arms two legs and a head.
RB that’s not rue. Many of them now have other sets of arms legs and heads that you and I are paying for, just because they opened their legs to others.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
Red, where were the people in 1901 who could manage border protection as it is now required? Or Provide a safe air transport environment? Or even manage the taxation affairs of 4.3 million people, or provide education and healthcare for that many people? We now engage with the world as an independent nation and are now an outpost of Britain Inc. so we have a diplomatic service of our own. We have fisheries to manage and protect on a scale undreamed of in 1901. There are more but you can find them as well as I can.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
@Simon- do you work? Why hasn’t your job been outsourced to the Phillipines?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
What I know is my experience of 20+ years in Auckland both before and after MetroWater came in. If you accept my 1:22 comment, then it’s quite likely they would pad the prices, because they have to show a profit, and where else are they going to get it from?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on Stuff.co.nz?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
“Red, where were the people in 1901 who could manage border protection as it is now required?”
Brian, where was the damage to the country then that resulted from lack of border control?
You’re only buying into myths. We need government because government is needed.
“Or even manage the taxation affairs of 4.3 million people, or provide education and healthcare for that many people?”
Brian, it is not the government’s role to provide education and health care. Look at the disaster we end up with when they try to.
As for taxation, it would be easy if we didn’t have government stealing so much money from the productive. One cheque from each person per year.
Your head is full of socialist rubbish Brian. And the most salient example to prove this is when your argument, even if I accepted it, would only lead to a percentage growth in public service numbers concurrent to the population growth, when we all know the situation is far far worse than that.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
Let’s have some facts in respect of the size of our public service.
The cap in NZ is set at approximately 39000.
That bastion of non-sovietness, the USA has 4.43 million federal employees, that’s 60% more federal public servants per capita than our comparatively lean mean public service. And on top of that each of the 50 states has its own massive payroll. Australia has a similar issue with a degree of duplication between states, and with federal government.
Will someone please point me to a country whose public service is smaller per capita, but whose economic situation is at least no worse than ours?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
Red, as I understand your position, it is based upon the number of public servants required to run your idealized minimal government. I seriously doubt that it will ever occur, or that the average voter shares your enthusiasm for it. The services you would dispense with seem to come indispensable when you threaten to take them away.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Thanks for asking Robert I own a business but seriously considering running some of the functions out of China.
Actually thinking about holograms there will be no universities in NZ in 20 years time. A university out of Singapore or the States could handle NZ students. NZ might as well get the process underway now.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Brian you should look up something called global wage arbitrage. It is coming to government departments sooner or later. Especially the broke governments like most of Europe.
Europe is bankrupt its gone, American is 2 years behind. NZ govt isn’t bankrupt but NZ private debt is nearly 100% of GDP. It is only a matter of time before this private debt is transferred to the govt’s balance sheet.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
Simon thanks for that info. I’m not sure how strongly I agree with the viability of off-shoring a lot of govt work. Yes, some you can. A lot, you can’t. Apart from contact centres and IT, what else do you see as candidates.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
So it’s government by twitter now, why am I not surprised, it’s run by twits.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
Here’s one example: Fireblight. Believed indigenous to North America, and cause of a 100-year-or-so trade dispute with Australia.
Here’s another one, that we’ve narrowly dodged a few times, I believe: Foot and mouth disease
If foot and mouth became permanently established here, it would basically kill our meat export industry.
In your ideal world, with no government-enforced border control, how do farmers protect themselves from the spread of diseases and parasites?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Wow, I thought those links would point to outbreaks of such diseases in 1901 in NZ. But guess what. They didn’t.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 4:01 pm
39000 public sector employees??
What alternative universe are you living in Brian? Here’s a McCully press release from 2002, and we all know what way the numbers have gone since then.
—————————————–
Media Release
Murray McCully
National State Services Spokesperson
4 September 2002
A lot of mouths to feed
New Zealand’s taxpayers have a lot of mouths to feed according to statistics contained in the State Services Commission briefing papers to incoming Ministers released today. The National Party spokesperson on State Services, Murray McCully says the papers disclose a total of 223,700 full time employees in the public sector.
“The papers show there are 30,000 staff spread across 36 Government departments, another 23,000 in non public service departments like the Police and the Defence Forces, 155,000 staff in Crown entities like schools and hospitals, 14,000 staff in SOE’s, 1,500 in the Offices of Parliament and 200 at the Reserve Bank.
“Add these numbers to the 400,000 on income-tested benefits like the unemployment benefit, DPB and invalids benefit (there were 397,794 in the official statistics last December) and another 430,000 receiving New Zealand Superannuation (428,419 as at December) and we have over 1,050,000 individuals dependent upon the nation’s taxpayers. And that’s before bringing support like special benefit and the accommodation supplement into consideration.
“Quarterly employment survey statistics show full time employees at 1,187,000 as at May 2002. The State Services staffing figures released today, when placed alongside the most recent Social Services statistics (their briefing papers to incoming Ministers have yet to be released) show that the nations hard working employees have a lot of mouths to feed.”
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
“Will someone please point me to a country whose public service is smaller per capita, but whose economic situation is at least no worse than ours?”
Singapore, same population, same workforce but much higher standard of living, working Police Force, working Army Navy and Air Force (with real jet fighters) has 120,000 civil sector workers.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
You are correct, my apologies. I misread a press release by Tony Ryall:
The cap on the size of core government administration has been set at 38,859 full time equivalent (FTE) staff positions. The cap is based on the number of FTE staff in Public Service departments and selected Crown entities plus unfilled vacancies as at 31 December 2008. It is also expected that the numbers of communications and public relations staff will be reduced.
A global cap allows for greater flexibility in rebalancing staff numbers and resources between and within organisations to focus on frontline service delivery across the State Services.
Vote:The weasel word here was core though that ought to have been trumped by “global”
June 26th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Just found the SSC’s official employment stats. According to the published table as at June 2009 we have 44,672 FTE employees
With apologies for my laziness in formatting:
Department June
2009
Agriculture & Forestry1 1295
Archives2 137
Auditor-General3 .
Building & Housing4 348
Chief Executives5 31
Child, Youth & Family Services6 .
Conservation 2062
Corrections 7114
Courts7 .
Crown Law Office 182
Culture & Heritage 100
Customs 1166
Defence 60
Economic Development 746
Education 2530
Education Review Office 219
Environment 294
Fisheries 447
Foreign Affairs & Trade 900
Government Communications Security Bureau8 310
Health9 1442
Inland Revenue 6025
Internal Affairs 1424
Justice10 3113
Labour11 1887
Land Information New Zealand 516
Maori Development 403
National Library 356
NZ Food Safety Authority12 500
Pacific Island Affairs 41
Prime Minister & Cabinet 101
Public Trust Office13 .
Research, Science & Technology 73
Serious Fraud Office 30
Social Development14 9178
Social Policy15 .
State Services Commission 211
Statistics New Zealand 875
Transport16 171
Treasury 355
Womens Affairs 30
Totals 44,672
There are some oddities such as courts which occur due to restructuring. The court employees appear under “justice”
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on Stuff.co.nz?
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on Facebook?
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on TradeMe?
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on Bebo??
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on emailing jokes that everyone has read?
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on Kiwiblog, Red Alert, Frogblog
Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is spent working??
Vote:Maybe the Govt Departments could reveal how much time is wasted on Govt Departments?
June 26th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
how do you get 16,000 in transport?
that could nearly be 1 billion just for wages.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
how do you get 16,000 in transport?
that could nearly be 1 billion just for wages.
Vote:Well it is 1 billion less the speeding fine of $120 I paid today
June 26th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
must be a well funded sector.
fines, regos, fuel tax…
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
Steve, the number in transport is 171 the 16 preceding it is a footnote number. Follow the link for the properly formatted spreadsheet.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 6:17 pm
for sure my mistake, change that to ministry of socialist development.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 6:34 pm
Got caught repeating from Caleb, my fault, should have had a think first
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
Notwithstanding my personal thoughts of the functions of government, considerations as to right size of public service are interesting. One obvious consideration, regardless of desirability of size, MUST be affordability.
We may argue about the various economic models associated with going into debt in order to fund our consumption.
Common sense, and now experience tells us this is neither a good idea nor sustainable.
Perhaps an option to ‘right size’ services will be to make the use of – and payment for – state supplied services, optional. It is certainly an ethically correct consideration.
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 8:22 pm
I’m sorry, WHY are govt. departments allowing access to twitter (I’m assuming via the web)?
Vote:June 26th, 2010 at 10:09 pm
Expat: I personally wouldn’t defend it, but I know some very large private sector organizations including some of the global consultancies are starting to see twitter as a legitimate channel for business communication. I don’t get it myself.
Just to be devil’s advocate for a moment, if anyone wants to hold a stop watch on me for a moment’s goofing off during the day, they had better damn well bring their stop watch around at night and in the weekends when time that is (by tradition) “mine” gets used for work related tasks.
I wonder if the author of the article that started this thought to check how much personal time is given back to the employer without recognition or acknowledgment. The old divisions between the bosses time and personal time are eroding, and the balance isn’t always in favour of the employee.
Vote:June 28th, 2010 at 11:11 am
Prof Harmer – damn straight – count up the hours of work done out-of-hours and see how that computes. This story is just journos trying to sell papers…
Something their shareholders might support!
Vote: