Public Service Amendment Bill risks rolling back decades of fairness

The Public Service Amendment Bill, currently before Parliament, is presented by government as a step to strengthen accountability and improve performance, however, the proposed changes risk dismantling decades of progress on equity and inclusion.

Te Uru Tāngata Centre for Workplace Inclusion has urged the Select Committee to reject the Bill in its current form.

The myth of meritocracy

The Bill is framed around the principle of “merit” but, in any workplace, what counts as merit is shaped by the processes and safeguards that determine whose skills and potential are recognised. Without deliberate checks against bias, the definition of merit narrows, favouring those who already hold cultural, social, or institutional advantage.

International research has consistently shown that when diversity considerations are stripped out of hiring processes, decision-makers unconsciously lean toward candidates who resemble themselves. In the context of the public service, this risks producing leadership that is less representative and less effective in addressing the needs of a diverse population.

Far from raising standards, the removal of diversity provisions could entrench homogeneity and risks creating a false meritocracy—one in which capability across the wider pool of talent goes unrecognised.

Key areas of concern

Te Uru Tāngata’s submission highlighted the following key areas where the Bill erodes fairness safeguards:

• Loss of diversity obligations – Sections requiring the public service to reflect society and foster inclusion would be repealed.
• Narrower leadership pathways – Appointment panels for chief executives would no longer need to consider diversity and inclusiveness, risking entrenched homogeneity at the top.
• Removal of equity safeguards – Pay equity and anti-bias provisions would be dismantled, potentially reversing progress on closing ethnic pay gaps.
• Shift in purpose – References to long-term public interest and active citizenship would be dropped, with a focus on short-term responsiveness instead.
  
  

Taken individually, each change may appear technical. Taken together, they represent a decisive step away from a system that actively works to level the playing field.

Consequences for trust and cohesion

Our public service is more than an employer of thousands. It is a cornerstone of our democracy, entrusted to serve all New Zealanders. To erode the foundations of fairness within it is to weaken not just a workforce, but the social fabric that holds us together.