By Political Editor Duncan Garner
Prime Minister John Key has signalled he's taking ownership of the public service shake-up.
He's now responsible for the results - and the job losses.
He's positioned the shake-up as one of the most important agenda items this term. It's up there with getting back into surplus by 2014/15, the welfare reforms and the Christchurch rebuild.
So what should we make of all this?
It's clear first and foremost that National believes the public service is too big. It has made it clear it wants to save $1 billion over the next four years by making inroads and cuts into the public service by way of targeting departmental baseline funding.
Last May's Budget showed $1 billion will be slashed from public services over the next few years. That means from this year the effect will become noticeable.
The Government is heaping pressure and responsibility for these cuts onto chief executives, by forcing them to find from existing budgets the money they had previously been given to fund superannuation and KiwiSaver contributions. It means they have to make staff redundant or slash programmes - or both. What other options do they have?
It's the one area the Government does actually control and have direct influence over. So it's about cuts. Make no mistake - the changes start with cuts.
But of course politicians have to change the language and Key and his team did well on that in the first term. They won the argument. They talked about moving staff from the back office and beefing up the frontline. They stayed on message. They refused to move from it. They had a mandate to trim back the 40,000 strong public service and they did it.
But now it gets tougher. Stage two is harder. Especially given Key has made it a priority.
He's now talking about more departmental mergers, more backroom staffing changes, more hubs involving I.T, human resources and legal services coming together to service numerous departments where it works and more focus on "outcomes." That means they want the public service to perform. They want targets.
But Key's also talking about Smartphones replacing people. How many times have we heard that computers will replace people?
It's Treasury speak from the 80s. But has it's time come? Can robots really replace people? And how far will National go?
John Key is making a speech on all this within a few weeks. He will outline more of National's thinking.
He's signalled the private sector might be given some of the tasks. Watch Labour cry foul over that.
But Key's test is this. Will the wider public really notice a more efficient public service? A better IRD? A better WINZ? A better DOC? A better court system? If you cut DOC workers, how can the DOC estate be a better managed place?
Or will they just focus on those that get thrown on scrapheap?
Can you really do more with less? Can Smartphones really replace people? And what sort of service do you get?
If you take one billion dollars out of a wider service does the boat go faster?
As one right wing Parliamentary worker said to me yesterday - the day the 78-year-old Parliamentary messenger/courier with one dodgy leg and one arm, who can't lift more than a kilo gets sacked is the day you know National has truly got stuck into the public service.
It might be a bit dramatic - but change is also not a bad thing.
I work for a private sector media organisation that has pretty tight budgets and always has - especially if I compare it to TVNZ where I worked for seven years. They still have too many people. Too many managers, too many people in their newsroom doing nothing. They don't know how well staffed they are - still.
So I look at the public service and say change can happen - and it must. Some departmental offices are still staffed well - it looks like a luxury from where I sit. The real world is a tough hard place. The world has changed.
Public services across Europe are getting massive shake-ups. Tens of thousand of people are losing their jobs.
But no one should be fooled that these changes are driven by a desire to have a better, sexier, more responsive public service.
It's first and foremost driven by a desire to save one billion dollars and to get back into surplus by 2014/15.
And that means doing less with less - and sacking thousands of people on the way through.
That's the truth - and National should, as Brenda Pilott from PSA said yesterday - come clean on it, Mr Key.
I think Aucklanders are convinced about the need for change but Wellingtonians are shit scared - they're shaking in their brown shoes and long socks.