Elected governments set policy, not government agencies who can advise but ultimately do what they’re told. That’s democracy. Readers may recall that I was a member of the board of New Zealand’s Tertiary Education Commission. As an office holder, my opinions on tertiary education policy could be expressed privately, but not publicly. With my second term about to expire (two terms is the normal maximum) I’d been thinking of writing an opinion article tentatively titled “What I’d do if I was in charge of tertiary education, now I’m not.” It would have been radical and provocative. However, the new government has seen fit to appoint me for a third term.  So I am and I can’t!

However I would like to pay tribute to my departing colleagues Kaye Turner and John Blakey, both members of the founding board, and Graeme Fraser, who joined us  a year or so after we’d started. This requires a little history. From 1999 until 2002, I was on the board of the NZ Manufacturers Federation and somehow became an advocate for industry’s views on what was wrong with the country’s tertiary education system, critical of the policies of both the existing National government and then the subsequent Labour government.  So you can imagine my surprise when, in July 2002 I was asked to accept appointment to the board of a new government agency to manage the funding of all tertiary education in New Zealand. (Lesson - sometimes it’s better to keep your mouth shut!)

The Ministry of Education did most of the policy development in those early days. The new Tertiary Education Commission implemented those policies once the Minister approved them.  Some things were very challenging to deal with; for example:

• inheriting (with a guarantee of no redundancies) 300 staff who administered one important but relatively small policy and funding stream and less than 50 staff who struggled to administer another 20 times bigger in money and complexity;
• officious and sometimes bizarre micro-management from other government agencies;
• contradictory policies;
• out-of-control funding mechanisms;
• dealing with a large, incredibly diverse group of over 700 education providers (public and private), some of whose primary goal seemed to be maximising the money they could get out of government, irrespective of credible educational outcomes.

It was, frankly, a mess.

I remember the first time the nascent commission met one evening in August 2002.  With our (at the time) tiny staff, we each presented our take on the situation and what we saw as the big issues.  Our combined list of Top Ten Issues has proven a huge task ever since.  Getting the political, institutional and operating stars to align before many of them could be addressed took a very long time (and is still a work in progress as I write this).  There have been false starts and mistakes made, battles with bureaucracy, mangled communications, litigious education providers (both public and private sector), and a perpetual high-profile political context to everything.

One of the oft-made criticisms of the TEC is that it grew into a huge bureaucracy,  Actually, the TEC has never been bigger than the combined size of the various agencies it replaced or absorbed, except when we were finally able to rejig the organisation to fit its purpose while also changing the fundamental design of the funding process.  The old system and organisation still needed to work while we built the new one, but was quickly down-sized once we’d got it implemented. There’s an important general message - if you want less bureaucrats, having fewer regulations and simpler policies is a major part of the way forward.

Many things required smarter policy thinking, and over time, the TEC has taken over much of that task - a credit to the quality of the people.  There’s still a lot to do and some of those Top Ten Issues are still to be nailed.  As Sir Humphrey Appleby might say, some problems require “a very bold and brave minister” to tackle them.   Choosing between the lesser of two evils and occasional dead-rat-swallowing are things you have to get used to! However, many things have steadily improved, and the system is starting to work as intended.

When after 3 terms of Labour-led government, a National-led government took over, there were only 3 board members who’d been there from the beginning, all of whose second terms had expired. Our appointments were extended while the new administration settled in, learnt how things worked, and developed its policy direction.  It’s gratifying that the administrative machine we’ve built at the TEC has proved more than capable of quickly and relatively easily enabling the new government to make some significant policy changes in the confidence that implementation will be relatively straightforward.  That’s again a credit to the commission’s staff, my past and present colleagues on the board, and those officials from other agencies and ministries who supported us.

So I say thank you to Kaye, John and Graeme for your unflagging commitment, support, advice, thoughtful criticism and friendship.

Now, Minister, I have got one or two radical suggestions to make.