In the wake of the recent revelations regarding the state of working relationships within Minister Kiri Allan’s office, I feel compelled to respond to Andrea Vance’s article in The Post. As The Opportunities Party candidate for Wellington Central, a former public servant and private secretary under Minister James Shaw during his Minster of Statistics term, I want to share my perspective on this discussion.

Further bolstered by my current postgraduate studies at Victoria University as a Political Scientist, where I’ve focused on the insidious and invisible mechanics of institutional discrimination and oppression, I aim to shed light on a systemic issue that extends beyond Minister Allan.

The allegations emerging from Minister Allan’s office are undoubtedly troubling but by no means unique. My experience as a private secretary, a former public servant, and my current academic endeavours all converge to highlight a stark reality: the absence of formal complaints is not due to a lack of issues, but rather because the bureaucratic processes in place stifle such complaints before they see the light of day. During my research on this topic, I found that the Public Service considers does not discriminate because it does not have many formal complaints. This is just not true.

Indeed, the mere fact that senior officials from the National Emergency Management Agency, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and the Department of Conservation have taken the step to voice their concerns publicly is nothing short of extraordinary. It underscores how institutional frameworks can make it challenging for legitimate grievances to be adequately addressed.

I must stress that this is not a personal issue isolated to certain individuals. The majority of senior officials and ministers, particularly those within the current government, undoubtedly have noble intentions. Yet, they are entangled in a web of outdated policies, internal processes, and unspoken rules and norms that go unnoticed but are heavily institutionalised. These archaic structures, bereft of substantial evidence to support their efficacy, unwittingly serve as breeding grounds for systemic discrimination and oppression within New Zealand Public Service.

The perpetual cycle of reviews of the working environment in Parliament, yielding little to no tangible improvements, is a cause for concern. It is, in fact, one of the primary motivations behind my decision to contest in Wellington Central. I aspire to work alongside the Public Service Commission, the wider public service sector, and Parliamentary Services, to ensure that institutional procedures concerning internal complaints are reviewed and improved to guarantee a fair and just working environment, especially for the growing diverse workforce.

Such a transformation would require shifting the burden of proof from the victims to the institutions themselves. This would prevent the process from perpetuating victimisation, driving victims to leave, and allowing culprits to escape accountability due to institutional inertia or lack of awareness. The time to review and reform these deeply entrenched issues is now. The wellbeing of our public servants and the integrity of our institutions depend on it.

© Scoop Media