IR-01-24-36856
6 November 2024
W. Forest
[FYI request #28797 email]
Tēnā koe Miss Forest
Request for information
I refer to your Official Information Act 1982 (OIA) request of 18 October 2024, for the
following information:
Please provide the copy of the proposal or impact assessment of the cost savings
that has been provided to the minister to make a decision that eventual y led to 170
roles being made redundant when the government asked for budget savings of
$55m.
As well as a significant investment in Police, the Government’s 2024 Budget asked Police
to make savings of $55 mil ion through a reduction in employee headcount. At the time it
was estimated 175 roles would need to be disestablished to achieve the required savings.
Following this announcement in May, detailed design work was commissioned. A
document outlining the proposed changes was released to Police staff for consultation,
with the consultation period running from 20 August to 10 September. A substantial
amount of feedback was received and considered by the Executive Leadership Team,
following which a final decision document was released to staff on 9 October.
Attached is a copy of Police’s Budget 2024 Savings Proposal for a reduction in Corporate
Support FTEs. Please note that Police was original y asked to make savings of 350 FTEs
and you wil see that this is reflected in the Proposal document I am releasing to you.
However, as noted above the Government subsequently reduced the amount of savings
required of Police.
Some information has been withheld under the following sections of the OIA:
•
9(2)(a), to protect the privacy of natural persons
•
9(2)(f)(iv), to maintain the constitutional conventions for the time being which
protect the confidentiality of advice tendered by Ministers of the Crown and
officials
•
9(2)(g)(i), to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and
frank expression of opinions by or between or to Ministers of the Crown or
members of an organisation or officers and employees of any public service
agency or organisation in the course of their duty.
Please note that the ‘Total’ column of the table at the top of page 7 incorrectly summed
the net FTE reduction. At the time this paper was submitted the total reduction was
proposed to be 350 FTE which would have been achieved in the 2025/26 Financial Year.
No further reductions were proposed for later years.
Where information has been withheld in this response Police considers the interests
requiring protection by withholding the information are not outweighed by any public
interest in release of the information.
Please note that as part of its commitment to openness and transparency, Police
proactively releases some information and documents that may be of interest to the
public. An anonymised version of this response may be publicly released on the New
Zealand Police website.
You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of this
decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.
Nāku noa, nā
Leigh MacDonald
ED Strategy & Transformation
New Zealand Police
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
Annex 2: Budget 2024 Savings Template
Section 1: Overview
Section 1A: Basic initiative information
Initiative title (max 120
Reduction of Corporate Support Police Employee budget by equivalent of 350 FTEs
characters)
Lead Minister
Minister of Police
Agency Police
This initiative proposes to reduce the Corporate Support Police Employee budget by the
equivalent of 350 FTE’s based on the financial year 23/24 baseline budget. This will be
achieved using a phased approach to generate financial savings of $40.9M per annum once
Initiative description
at those levels (excluding transition costs of 14.2M). This would involve a large restructuring
(max 800 characters)
and redundancy programme. Given the scale this would be achieved over two years. The
target functional group wil be Corporate Support; s.9(2)(f)(iv) OIA
Type of saving (PA
X
Baseline reduction ☐ Targeted policy savings ☐ Capital pipeline review
objective in CFISnet)
Is this a cross-Vote
initiative?
N
Click or tap here to enter text.
Is this a revenue
initiative?
N
Name: Louise Cameron
Name: Adam Crozier
s.9(2)(a) OIA
Agency contact
Phone:
Treasury contact Phone:
Email:
(Vote Analyst) Email:
[email address]
[email address]
Section 1B: Summary of savings profile
Operating funding available for return ($m)
2027/28 &
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
outyears*
Total
-
3.989
24.438
40.898
40.898
110.223
*For irregular outyears, add additional rows above to display the ful profile of the initiative. Delete “& outyears” for time-
limited funding. See the Guide to Submit ing Initiatives on CFISnet for Budget 2024 for more information on entering
outyears into CFISnet.
Capital funding available for return ($m)
23/24
24/25
25/26
26/27
27/28
28/29
29/30
30/31
31/32
32/33*
Total
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
*Extend the profile above if funding is needed beyond 2032/33.
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
1
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
Section 2: Alignment and options analysis
Section 2A: Alignment
The answer to each question must not exceed 1-2 paragraphs
☐ Addressing the rising cost of living
X
Delivering effective and fiscally
sustainable public services
Building for growth and enabling
Does this savings
☐ private enterprise
☐ No consequences
initiative have
consequences for the
Reducing Police employee personnel costs wil make a positive contribution towards living
Budget priorities? (if
within a reducing baseline. However, it wil impact effective service delivery as constabulary
there are implications for employees are likely to be diverted to undertake activities previously undertaken by
multiple Priorities, select
employees, and many employee roles require specialist skil sets and knowledge, risking the
the most relevant)
effectiveness of services delivered. It would also reduce the level of support received by all
remaining Police, reducing their ability to carry out their functions and hence reduce
operational service delivery to the public.s.9(2)(g)(i) OIA
Section 2B: Options analysis The answer to each question must not exceed 1-2 paragraphs
Police’s Fiscal Sustainability Programme was established to identify specific initiatives to
drive savings to manage Police’s forecast deficit position in the current and future financial
years. The scope of this programme was expanded to include options to achieve the
baseline reduction. Packages considered focus on four key areas:
•
Reducing and driving efficiencies within Police’s workforce
What was the process
•
Reducing, stopping or changing how Police deliver and provide services
used to select the
•
Reducing and driving efficiencies through Police asset base
preferred option?
•
Increasing the funding available to Police through cost recovery
This initiative was identified as part of a review into reducing and driving efficiencies within our
workforce, areas of growth were identified in the Police Employee workforce to minimise
impacting frontline services. These roles have increased since 2017 due to increased operational
workforce levels requiring additional support, prior government initiatives, freeing up
constabulary to deliver frontline activities, and to manage demand for services.
Section 3: Costs and benefits analysis
Section 3A: Benefits and non-fiscal costs The answer to each question must not exceed 1-2 paragraphs. The primary benefit of savings is fiscal. Therefore, the
primary purpose of this section is to highlight any risks or impacts of the savings initiative.
The Risks and Impacts section below is required for all initiatives invited into the capital pipeline review, regardless of
whether there are any changes are proposed to this initiative.
Where Savings would be generated by reducing the budgeted headcount by 350 Police Employee FTE (or the fiscal
do the equivalent) in Corporate Support across two years, this equates to a reduction of more than 30% of Police
savings Employee Corporate support positions.s.9(2)(f)(iv) OIA
or
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
2
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
revenue s.9(2)(f)(iv) OIA
arise
from?
.
Corporate Support positions assist Police by enabling operational staff to perform their roles. This includes
traditional corporate functions all large organisations are required to have such as Finance, Procurement, ICT,
and HR (including Recruitment). It also includes employees who more directly support the frontline by ensuring
the effective and efficient management of Police assets such as fleet, property, and people capability (uniforms,
body armour etc.). Many of these positions are responsible for keeping Police safe through ensuring compliance
with legislation and providing assurance on our systems and processes. Corporate Support roles also provide
the business intelligence and capability to run the business of Police as efficiently and effectively as possible.
These roles also ensure the physical safety and wel ness of front-line Police, though ensuring they can
communicate as required, they have fit for purpose equipment, and that they have the policies and training
required to be safe every day. s.9(2)(g)(i) OIA
Many of these corporate services are already at minimum resourcing levels. Where possible activities wil be
stopped and all but essential activities wil be directed to remaining employees. s.9(2)(f)(iv) OIA
. Comparison of Public Services
Commission data suggests that Police is already at or below the State Sector average, as a proportion of the
workforce, in key corporate support roles. The groupings do not match exactly the numbers in support roles (for
example Police Prosecutions employees are operational but are included within the ‘Legal, HR and Finance
professional category), however they clearly indicate that Police does not have support levels above other
agencies.
Occupational Group
State Sector
Police
Policy Analyst
6.0%
0.5%
Risks
ICT Professionals and Technicians
3.5%
3.2%
and
Legal, HR and Finance Professionals
5.2%
5.4%
impacts Clerical and Administrative Workers
9.1%
9.0%
Combined
23.8%
18.1%
Examples of where Police already has the bare minimum of employees in corporate support functions:
- Police’s recruitment team consistently hold two to three times more open roles then industry standards
in private sector recruitment agencies or equivalent state sector agencies and achieve industry leading
quality results such as attrition amongst new hires.
- Police has two employees dedicated to privacy, and one internal auditor. Organisations many times
smaller than Police have multiple people in equivalent roles.
- Police receive more media and Of icial Information Act requests than any other agency but have
significantly fewer employees managing these than several other agencies.
- Finance: Police has over 1000 cost centres; these are supported by a Finance team of only 40 FTEs.
- Mission critical ICT functions previously had been maintained by contractors and external service
providers. In many cases these have now been replaced by Police Employees at significant reduced
costs, it is not possible to remove both contractors and Employees and deliver critical services to front
line Constabulary employees.
The following are risks and impacts that wil be realised:
• s.9(2)(g)(i) OIA
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
3
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
• s.9(2)(g)(i) OIA
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
X
High
☐
Medium
☐
Low
Impact
on
s.9(2)(f)(iv) OIA
frontline
services
☐
Yes - positive
☐
Yes - negative
X
No impact
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
4
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
Climate An assessment would need to be carried out to determine climate impact when further analysis when
impact determining where and how many employees and what services would be impacted. Until this is carried out, we
can only determine there is unlikely to be any impact on the climate.
Section 3B: Status quo The answer to each question must not exceed 1-2 paragraphs.
Police currently budget $477.99m for 4,909 Police Employee FTEs. This is split between Corporate Support,
Status Operational Support and Operational Public Facing positions.
quo
Status quo would be to retain the current staff levels.
Existing operating funding for programme/service ($m)
2023/2
4
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28 & outyears* Total
-
-
-
-
-
-
*Extend the profile above to a “steady state” if funding into outyears is irregular. Delete “& outyears” for time-limited
funding.
Existing capital funding for programme/service ($m)
23/ 24/
24 25 25/26 26/27
27/28 28/29
29/30
30/31
31/32
32/33*
Total
- - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
*Extend the profile above if funding is needed beyond 2032/33.
Section 3C: Savings profile and cost breakdown The answer to each question must not exceed 1-2 paragraphs.
Redundancy / Restructuring work groups
• A reduction of the Corporate Support Police Employee budget by the equivalent of 350 FTE’s based
on the financial year 23/24 baseline.
Calculations are based on the following assumptions.
Formula
• Potential savings are calculated based on the average total remuneration of the Corporate Support
and
group. (excludes potential overhead savings).
assumpti
• Potential transition costs (redundancy payments) are assumed to be based on the formulae within
ons
the Band G-J Collective Employment Agreement.
underlyi
• It is assumed those made redundant have the same average remuneration and service period as the
ng
overall workgroup. i.e. No acknowledgment of those with higher potential redundancy payment being
costings
more likely to take voluntary redundancy.
• Impact of the annual leave pay out of the FTE’s made redundant has not been taken into
consideration.
• The process wil take 2 years to be fully effective commencing 1 July 2024.
Provide a breakdown of total initiative expenditure by individual expense category. Total operating and capital expenses in
this section must match the totals in
Section 1B:Summary of funding profile.
Insert additional rows as appropriate for
additional expense categories.
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
5
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
Recommended operating savings ($m)
Operatin
g
expense 2023/24
2024/25 2025/26
2026/27
2027/28 & outyears* Total
category [Name of
-
-
-
-
-
-
Departme
ntal
operating
expense
category] [Name of
-
-
-
-
-
-
Non-
Departme
ntal
operating
expense
category] Depreciat
-
-
-
-
-
-
ion
and/or
capital
charge (if
relevant)
Net FTE
-
funding
3.989
24.438
40.898
40.898
110.223
Net
-
-
-
-
-
-
contracto
r/consulta
nt
funding
Net FTE
-
-
-
-
-
-
and
contracto
r/consulta
nt
overhead
funding
-
-
-
-
-
-
[Name/ty
pe of
contingen
cy] Total
-
($m)
3.989
24.438
40.898
40.898
110.223
*Extend the profile above to a “steady state” if funding into outyears is irregular. Delete “& outyears” for time-limited
funding.
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
6
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
Headcou
Total
nt
2023/24
2024/25 2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
Change Total # of
-
(175)
(350)
(350)
(350)
(1,225)
net FTEs
(employe
es)
Total # of
-
-
-
-
-
-
net FTEs
(contracto
rs/consult
ants)
Total # of
-
(175)
(350)
(350)
(350)
(1.225)
net FTEs
(employe
es and
contract
ors/cons
ultants)
Additional occupation breakdown of FTE changes (count and funding) over the forecast period
Occupation
Net count changed
Net funding changed
Net amount overheads
($m)
changed ($m)
Managers
-
-
-
Policy Analyst
-
-
-
Information Professionals
-
-
-
Social, Health and
-
-
-
Education Workers
ICT Professionals and -
-
-
Technicians
Legal, HR and Finance -
-
-
Professionals
Other Professionals not -
-
-
included elsewhere
Inspectors and Regulatory -
-
-
Officers
Contact Centre Workers
-
-
-
Clerical and Administrative -
-
-
Workers
Other Occupations
-
-
-
Recommended capital savings ($m)
Capital expense
23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 32/33* Total
category
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
7
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
[Name of Departmental -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
capital expense category] [Name of Non-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Departmental capital
expense category] [Name/type of
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
contingency] Total ($m)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
*Extend the profile above if funding is needed beyond 2032/33.
Section 4: Delivery
Implementation of savings The answer to each question must not exceed 1-2 paragraphs
The number of FTEs and full financial year fiscal savings and costs are:
Savings
Redundancy costs
Const.
Emp
Total
($M)
($M)
Employee
Reduction
0
350
350
40.9
$14.2
Implementation of
savings from this Police assumes an average reduction of 14.6 FTEs made each month from July 2024 to June 2026.
programme,
This means the redundancy cost wil be evenly spread across FY 24/25 and FY25/26. The savings due
activity or
to the reduction in employees is aligned to same period. In practice the reduction would not be
investment
consistent each month as phases would be conducted by business group, but averages have been
used for modelling.
This option cannot be fully implemented through normal attrition with no recruitment into Corporate
Support roles until overall numbers reach the target.
Police would look at a range of options for reducing numbers or gaining the equivalent fiscal saving
other than compulsory redundancy. This would include considerations such as encouraging employees
working reduced hours, taking periods of Leave without pay, or earlier retirement. It is not possible to
accurately assess the implications of each approach until a full assessment has been undertaken.
However, they are unlikely to move outside of the range of costs outlined above.
Transition costs associated with the savings initiative ($m)
2027/28 &
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
outyears*
Total
-
7.088
7.088
-
-
14.176
Was this activity N
If yes, please provide the Cabinet minute reference for this initiative, and the Budget
funded from the
initiative ID (if applicable).
Climate
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
8
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
Emergency
Response Fund?
Section 5: Equity
The answer to each question must not exceed 1-2 paragraphs.
Timing of costs and
Costs, benefits, and risks would be expected in the short (0-5 years) to medium term (5-10 years),
benefits
dependant on the level of cuts required and option selected and the availability of funding for
transition costs (redundancy) should they be required.
Y/N There are no immediately apparent implications, however, a continual assessment of
Specific implications
this would need to be conducted as more assessment is carried out on what
regarding the Crown’s
roles/business units would be impacted. Given the scale of the cuts, and that those
obligations under the
responsible for providing specialist advice and knowledge would be affected, it is likely
Treaty of Waitangi
that Police would lose capability that enables the understanding and meeting of Treaty
of Waitangi obligations.
This initiative would release a significant number of employees, at a time when other agencies
are doing similar, or at least not hiring into these functions. This wil mean that some of these
employees wil have significant challenges finding employment matching their current skil level.
This wil have significant negative lifetime earning effects on them and their families. The roles
Distributional Impacts under consideration have a very high proportion of female employees so it is likely that this
group wil be dis-proportionally affected. In addition, Police has been working for a number of
years to increase representation from previously under-represented ethnicities and other
groups. The Corporate Support functions have more employees from these groups than other
parts of Police. This distribution would be affected by any cuts.
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
9
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
Section 6: Capital pipeline review - Project detail
For initiatives being considered as part of the Capital Pipeline Review:
For initiatives that are being reported as a programme, please list al the individual projects in that programme with a capital
value of over $50m for Infrastructure, or $15m for Data and Digital and Organisational Change investments, and provide the
additional details noted below. For initiatives that refer to a single project, please complete a single line for your project.
Please ensure that details and figures in this table align to your capital pipeline summary in Annex Five.
Region of
Planning start Expected
Expected
Total capex
Total opex ($m)
Project name delivery
date
delivery start delivery end
($m)
date
date
[Name of
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
project]
[Name of
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
project]
[Name of
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
[●]
project]
BUDGET-SENSITIVE
10
