Global Financial Crisis (GFC)
The Fifth National Government’s first challenge upon election was responding to the GFC.69 From the initial text review, a number of the documents were related in some way to the GFC, with the number of texts appearing to drift off as New Zealand moved out of the recession period. This drop was especially visible with the texts from the community and voluntary sector, with no sample texts identified after 2010. This may also reflect fewer active media releases following the transfer of the Office of the Community and Voluntary Sector from MSD to DIA in 2011 as discussed previously. From the 20 sample documents selected, 7 specifically mentioned or referenced the recession, indicating that this was an important event that impacted on the Fifth National Government’s approach to the non-profit sector. The GFC was referenced as “the worst economic downturn in more than a generation” (1.3),70 and “the biggest global recession since the 1930’s” (1.7). Many of the policies and programmes referenced were contextualised with language such as “these tougher economic times” (1.1), “time of economic uncertainty” (1.2), and “economic downturn” (2.1).
The texts indicated that the economic pressures had resulted in more burden on government funding due to a drop in philanthropic giving. “Some philanthropic trusts and foundations face declining income and capital. This is forcing them to scale back their grant making, or at least to consider doing so in the future” (1.3). “Many of our largest corporates are reducing their donations and sponsorships, and the traditionally generous private giving from individual New Zealander is also likely to be affected. And of course, the Government has less income from taxation to distribute” (1.3). Another result of the
69 See chapter 3, page 51 for full discussion. 70
85 GFC identified in the texts was significant pressure on social services, noting “the community sector is often the first line of response to communities which are hurting” (2.4). “Demand on your services is likely to grow in the months ahead – I know many of you are dealing with this already” (1.3), “the human casualties behind those economic trends very often end up on your door step” (1.3). Texts across the portfolios identified Government responding to increased pressure on non-profits because of the GFC, including establishment of the Community Response Fund.71 This aimed to provide “crisis funding to providers of critical services that are having real trouble maintaining their services … (and) … are experiencing big increases in demand for their services” (1.3). Here the non-profit sector was told by the Government that “we must be resilient” (2.1), with the GFC positioned as a time for innovation, “using the recession as a catalyst for change” (2.1).
Welfare reform and the social investment approach
Another key discourse domain identified was welfare reform. As outlined in chapter three, the Government undertook a significant programme of welfare reform in 2012. Welfare reform was first mentioned in the texts in response to the Green Paper for Vulnerable Children and the Children’s Action Plan (2012) (1.9). Strong language was used in the texts to introduce the need for reform, for example “our welfare system is failing many” (1.9), “the days of a passive system are over” (1.9), and “I will reform the system” (1.9). As noted in chapter three,72 the social investment approach informed welfare reform (Deloitte, 2016). The texts closely linked welfare reform to the benefits of social investment. “This will also transform our system into an investment approach” (1.9), “this is what our social investment approach is about – securing long-term results for vulnerable New Zealanders” (1.13). Social investment was a critical concept of many of the documents. The finance portfolio document introduced social investment as a:
toolkit that will help us understand all of our customers – but we can choose to focus on groups that are a high priority at any particular time…at its core, social investment is a more rigorous and evidence-based feedback loop linking service delivery to a better understanding of people’s needs and indicators of the effectiveness of social services (3.1).
71 A fund established to provide assistance to organisations facing cost pressures to deliver vital services. 72
86
Outcome based contracting and Whānau Ora
Performance or outcomes based contracting was identified in chapter two as an alternative model to the traditional outputs based approach. Moving towards outcomes contracting was a core domain of many of the texts. “We will also simplify their reporting requirements, so it’s more effective and results-based” (1.4), and “I am expecting a transformation from output based, tick-box contracts to outcome based relational contracts” (1.8). This was positioned as a significant shift in the contracting model, moving towards “a more results-focused and evidence-based approach” (1.12). For MSD in particular, results focused contracting aimed to “create more targeted and efficient purchasing of the $331 million each year we invest into social sector services” (1.13).
Whānau Ora73 was introduced as a key results focused initiative (1.8, 1.14) that aimed to take a holistic Whānau approach to social services through utilising integrated contracting with provider collectives. This approach was positioned as a shift away from the neoliberal contracting model, “to be Whānau centred rather than contract focused” (1.8). Whānau Ora was positioned as “effective as a means of improving results for many vulnerable families, particularly Māori and Pasifka, with whom social service agencies have traditionally struggled to engage” (1.14). This alternative model was made possible through the coalition arrangements with the Māori party, for whom this was their flagship policy. This indicates an attempt by Government to move away from the neoliberal contract model.
Capability investment in the non-profit sector
The final domain identified through the texts was the government’s investment in non- profit capability. This was positioned by the government as essential “for Non- Government Organisations to deliver extra high-quality services” (1.6). For example, the announcement of the Capability Investment Resource, “aimed at building a stronger, adaptable and more integrated social sector” (1.10). This funding was provided so non- profits could work “independently or with specialist mentors, to build a plan that will develop and strengthen their organisations” (1.11), and to enable “organisations to really grow and improve their ability to support New Zealanders in need” (1.11). The Quality Services Fund was also announced “for social sector NGOs to move toward integrated service delivery, remove duplication, merge back room functions, improve skill training
73
87 and share best practice” (1.6). This fund aimed to “address gaps in delivery, encourage collaboration and support new high quality, innovative services” (1.6), indicating a move towards professionalisation for non-profits through adopting private sector models: one of the critiques of the neoliberal contracting approach.