4 APPENDICES

	0800	0900	Joint Call Centre	Contracting Out	Centralised Service
How is it different from what we do now?	Phone service centralised rather than regional Currently there is a number of points of entry for consumers to all areas of the Ministry Improved database Emphasis on providing consumers with written material Use of recorded messages and push button options on phone Phone staff not legally qualified No regional offices	User pays Centralised number rather than three regional numbers Improved database Use of recorded messages and push button options on phone Phone staff not legally qualified	Combines the inquiries functions of both agencies Agencies share resources Centralised 0800 number Use of recorded messages and push button options on phone Phone staff not legally qualified	No Ministry Regional Advice Service Advice Service is run by locally contracted service agents who provide a Consumer Advice Service as defined by the contract	Centralised rather than regional No telephone advice service No regional presence CAB/CLC/BAS hotline rather than just priority status All information and education work provided from Wellington

	0800	0900	Joint Call Centre	Contracting Out	Centralised Service
What are the advantages of this option?	Will have a higher national profile, may increase calls from target consumers Access to all of MCA Database will record all calls to 0800, enables the Ministry to provide improved data on consumers’ experience in the market place Access point to our Legal Advisors for assistance	A user pays system frees the operational budget and enables the Ministry to undertake project work as listed in the preferred option Legal Advisors can concentrate on complex disputes involving target consumers	Sharing of resources between agencies Integration of databases (if agreed upon) Virtual technology enables calls to be answered at separate sites and transferred to the appropriate Advisor Database will record all calls to 0800, enables the Ministry to provide improved data on consumers’ experience in the marketplace Access point to our Legal Advisors for assistance	Potential for the Ministry to have a wider regional presence than it has now Potential for the service available to consumers to be of a higher level than other options Community agencies (CABx and BAS) consulted by the Ministry consider a local presence by a community service provider as the best way to provide service and information to target consumers	Easy to manage All staff are based in Wellington, so planning and development is simplified Staff skills are readily available Those targeted most effectively in this scenario are traders who can be worked with nationally

	0800	0900	Joint Call Centre	Contracting Out	Centralised Service
What are the disadvantages of this option?	The Ministry is not funded to provide a universal legal service Does not meet MCA’s objective of providing information and education to target consumers Research indicates few target consumers are likely to use the 0800 service Cost and resource intensive, means regional offices would have to be closed, so no local presence Cost of traveling for staff is high An 0800 number is likely to further dramatically increase calls Every call will not be answered personally	Unlikely target consumers will use 0900 service Doubtful traders will use 0900 service Difficult to assess the number of calls such a service will attract A user pays system may raise public expectation of service provided Duplication of CABx information provision role The Ministry will be subject to the same legal obligations as a private sector service provider Cost recovery charges are based on current call numbers, if these numbers are not met charges will need to be increased	May not be able to find technology compatible with the objectives of each agency The CC has a different objective from MCA (they are an enforcement agency, and have a different targeting policy) Duplication of CABx information provision role Does not meet MCA objective of providing information and education to target consumers Essentially continues the status quo	Issues of legal obligations of both contracting parties in terms of agency and accountability, need to be explored thoroughly Objectives and outcomes will differ depending on the skill and expertise of the service contractor Skills in the area of contract drafting will need to be acquired by the Ministry Unless the cost of managing contracts is offset against the amount granted to the successful tenderer, management of service contracts may see the Ministry confined to an administrative function Advice Service will become a commercial enterprise with concomitant responsibilities	Effective targeting and consultation relies on local networks, staff who are accepted and can operate appropriately within the group targeted, local knowledge of community dynamics is essential Travel costs will greatly increase in order to reach target consumers Staff will have to travel regularly to regions and the cost would offset gains from not needing to bring staff together Geographical distances, particularly in the South Island may result in fewer services to target consumers with the removal of regional offices

	0800	0900	Joint Call Centre	Contracting Out	Centralised Service
Conclusion	The Ministry is not funded to provide a universal legal service Option essentially a continuation of the status quo with the provision of a telephone service used predominantly by non-target consumers The service is resource intensive, therefore, regional offices would need to be closed Phone is not an effective medium of communicating with target consumers Limited provision of information and education service On balance, this option is not feasible given the resources and Ministry’s objectives	The Ministry is not funded to provide a universal legal service, and although this option is a user pays model, it would mean the Ministry providing a service that research shows target consumers will not use The figures given are projections only and call numbers will need to be high to cover set up costs Downward movement in call figures would threaten the Ministry’s operational budget On balance, this option is not feasible given the resources and Ministry’s objectives	The CC is not ready at this point in time to look at a joint call centre The CC has a different role from MCA (they are an enforcement agency whereas the Ministry’s role is informing and educating target consumers) The CC target traders and not consumers On balance, this option is not feasible given the resources and Ministry’s objectives	The Ministry is not funded to provide a universal legal service. This option would see this continue but contracting an external agency to deliver the service MCA would be required to commit resources that would otherwise be shifted to meeting stated objectives as set out in the preferred option On balance, this option is not feasible given the resources and Ministry’s objectives	The option of providing all the Ministry’s operational services from Wellington will be easier to manage. However, the cost of travel is unacceptable To centralise MCA’s service goes against research in respect of reaching and providing the best service for target consumers On balance, this option is not feasible given the resources and Ministry’s objectives

APPENDIX TWO REPORT ON CONSUMER FOCUS GROUPS Purpose The purpose of the focus groups was two-fold: to brief participants on the Ministry’s preferred option for how we propose to provide consumer information, education and advice in the future; and to gather participant’s feedback on our interim report findings - particularly about the preferred option and its likely impact on the communities/agencies that were represented. Participants Wellington - 17 June 1997 Te Puni Kokiri - Elizabeth Ashton Nga Kaiwhakamarama I Nga Ture - Charmaine Ross Te Aho Ruruku - Samantha Tamanui Lower Hutt Budget Advice Service - Serenah Nicholson Law Commission - Makere Papanui, Joanne Morris, Bridgit Laidler Department of Internal Affairs - Roy Hoerara PACIFICA - Jane See Pacific Island Resources Trust - Sophia Godfrey Samoan Capital Radio - Fa’aso’o Toetupelua Tongan Community - Niuselu Uesi Niuean Community - Lagi Sipili Fijian Community - Malaki Curulala Cook Island Community - David Isaia Citizens’ Advice Bureaux - Meg Flux, Janet Berry Budget Advisory Services (affiliated to NZFFBS) - Raewyn Nielsen, Robyn Evans Whitireia Community Law Centre - Bill Bevan Wellington South Community Law Centre - Belinda Rynhart Consumers’ Institute - Helen Wi Neera NZ Income Support Service - Misty Williamson Gisborne - 20 June 1997 Te Runanga o Turanganui-a-Kiwa - Sharon Maynard Te Puni Kokiri - Albert Stewart Ngati Porou Social Services - Judy Kururangi Radio Ngati Porou - Phil Reed Citizens’ Advice Bureau - Phil Hilder Budget Advisory Service - Thelma Maori Women’s Welfare League - Evelyn Te Kani Gisborne District Council - Bub Apelu Link Centre - Albie Gibson Christchurch - 20 June 1997 Te Puni Kokiri - Pura Parata Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs - Michelle O’Berg Pacific Island Fanau - Fred Sopoaga, Audrey Enright St Pauls Trinity Pacific - Rev Lapana Faletolu Pacific Island Evaluation Inc. - Maiava David Johnson Christchurch Community Law Centre - Nick Mc Bride, Kerry Nalder Kingdom Resources Trust (& Budget Advisory Service) - Susan Gill Christchurch Budget Advisory Service - Jan McKillop Southland Community Law Centre - Bob McLauchlan and another representative Citizens’ Advice Bureaux - Peter Francis, Norm Thornton, June Woodham, Daniel Doubleday, Jean Mclean, Bob Ryburn Department of Internal Affairs (Greymouth) - Jenny Robertson Auckland - 23 June 1997 Kaitaia Community House - Leanne Edwards Ngati Arohanui Trust - Betty Wark Maori Pacific Island Women’s Heatlth Collective - Jacinta Thompson Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua - Danny Patuawa Pacific Island Advisory Council - Siapu Tyrell, Lorna Lakua and two other representatives Radio 531PI - Sef Haouli Sosaiete Tina Samoa - Joanna Fuimaono Samoana - Kristina Maugatai Flaxmere Community Law Centre - Georgina Wahi Whakawatea Kaporeihana - Sandra Thompson Samoan Community Worker Free Budget Service - Trisha Halkert Youth Law Project - Nicole Robinson Mangere Community Law Centre - Andrew Lawson Grey Lynn Neighbourhood Law Office - Robyn Martin Citizens’ Advice Bureaux - Robyn Allpress, Sylvia Warren, Pat Goodchild, Margot Hart, Tony Smyth Feedback Feedback was received on the following issues: The Ministry’s purpose General feedback on the interim report’s findings Targeting Definition of ‘low income’ Pressure on community agencies Operation of the Consumer Disputes Service Operation of the community advisory agencies’ ‘hotline’ Training and resources Networking and information dissemination Notes were made of each session at each focus group and these are on file. The Ministry’s Purpose General comments were made at many of the focus groups that the Ministry should provide consumer information, education and advice programmes for all consumers. Those participants that expressed that view believed that Government should better fund the Ministry to achieve that end. Others commented that with additional funding the Ministry could increase its regional presence to provide a better service regionally (Christchurch and Auckland focus groups). Some felt that the Ministry should have enforcement power to deal with ‘rogue traders’ who do not comply with legislation - in particular, the Consumer Guarantees Act. General Feedback on the Interim Report’s Findings There was divided opinion at the focus groups about the withdrawal of the telephone advice service. Generally, representatives from Maori and Pacific Island communities and agencies considered that the withdrawal of the telephone service would have little impact on them because a telephone-based service is not a preferred method for receiving information. However, many community advisory agencies (such as CABx, BAS and CLCs) considered that removal of the telephone service would have significant impact on them in relation to fielding more consumer enquiries. Other community advisory agencies (Christchurch focus group) were supportive of the withdrawal of the telephone service because they felt that the service was largely reactive and resource intensive, which meant that the Ministry had limited capacity to undertake proactive work. Comment was made (Wellington focus group) that the Ministry should have considered the 0900 Call Centre option more fully. Targeting At each focus group there was general discussion about the Ministry’s targeting policy. Aside from the comments made that the Ministry should target all consumers, there was universal acceptance that the Ministry’s target groups (low income, Maori and Pacific Island people) were appropriate in that those groups consisted of many disadvantaged consumers. However, an opinion commonly held by CABx representatives was that there are other disadvantaged consumers that the Ministry is failing to reach with its current targeting policy, such as the elderly and new immigrants Another opinion that was commonly held, by representatives of Maori and Pacific Island communities/agencies (Wellington and Christchurch focus groups) was that the Ministry’s targeting policy was entirely appropriate because the underlying issue of vulnerability in the marketplace was due to ethnic and cultural background rather than a limited income. Feedback from all the focus groups supported the Ministry targeting the next generation of consumers (particularly strong message from the Auckland focus group). Support was also given for the Ministry’s enhanced work with traders and ensuring that traders in isolated areas are targeted too. Many participants at the focus groups agreed that the Ministry should continue targeting issues involving significant consumer detriment (such as credit and motor vehicles). However, comment was made (Wellington focus group) that we should also focus on electricity contracts, superannuation and life insurance. Definition of Low Income Concern was raised over the Ministry’s proposed definition of ‘low income’ (such as will the Ministry be means-testing? - Wellington focus group) and general comment was made about the difficulty of attempting to define such a group. However, there was universal agreement that those with incomes at benefit levels were receiving a ‘low income’. Some alternative definitions were made such as using the minimum wage, an income level of $30,000 per annum, income at benefit levels. Pressure on Community Agencies There was universal opinion that the preferred option would impact on all community agencies. The Ministry was reminded at all the focus groups that all community agencies rely on unpaid labour and have very limited resources. Comments were made that the additional pressure will require agencies to obtain more volunteer staff, consumer specialists and equipment such as extra phonelines and a fax. Specific criticism was made that the Ministry has a formalised relationship with only a limited number of community agencies. This is reflected in the preferred option in references to the support and training offered to agencies such as the CABx and BAS. The Ministry was reminded of the additional need for further information and advice that is generated by information and education programmes and projects such as Iwi and Pacific Island radio ones (strong message from Gisborne and Christchurch focus groups). Concerns were raised by a number of participants from CABx, CLCs and BAS that agencies such as CABx and BAS were moving more into an inappropriate role of ‘giving advice’ which is fraught with issues in terms of the agencies’ ability and who can legally provide ‘legal advice’. An observation was made (Auckland focus group) that the appropriate distinction should be drawn between providing information and ‘advice’. Operation of the Consumer Disputes Service Most participants were supportive of this feature of the preferred option. However, comments were made about the lack of detail in the interim report concerning this service. Most concern appeared to be about who could access this service and focused on the Ministry’s statement that the service would likely be restricted to target consumers. Some felt that access to the service should be more focused on the consumer’s ability to ‘help themselves’ rather than their income (Wellington focus group). Others felt that the service should be available to any consumer who needed assistance with a complex matter that required the Ministry’s specialist legal skills (Auckland focus group). Other comments stressed the importance of defining the parameters of this service such as whether the service will include a dispute resolution and/or an arbitration function. Operation of the Community Advisory Agencies’ ‘Hotline’ There was also universal support for this feature of the preferred option. However, a number of specific concerns were raised in relation to its operation. Most felt that it was imperative that it was adequately staffed. Others were concerned about the hours the service will be available (at the Wellington focus group the issue was raised that some law centres give advice outside normal business hours). Some sought clarification on practical issues such as whether resource orders could be made through the hotline and whether it was an appropriate avenue for passing on information about rogue traders or bad business practices. The Ministry was reminded by Maori and Pacific Island community representatives that the hotline needs to be available to them too. Training and Resources All community agencies said they needed additional resources, particularly in view of the Government trend of increasingly relying on community agencies to disseminate information and provide services to the public - services that are seen by these agencies as being ones that Government are responsible for providing. Many agencies requested more consumer training from the Ministry and the continued provision of written resources for the public and for agency workers to assist them in dealing with consumer enquiries (for example an updated consumer manual, regular updates about changes in legislation and trader compliance projects). Most Maori and Pacific Island community agency representatives requested access to the Ministry’s training and appropriate resources too. Those agencies that want more Ministry training and written/video resources urged the Ministry to make it a priority and to fund their agency’s consumer specialists. Networking and Information Dissemination Most participants agreed that effective networking was essential and must be ongoing. The Ministry was reminded to include other Government agencies when networking (in particular Te Puni Kokiri (TPK), New Zealand Income Support Service, Department of Internal Affairs) and to focus on ‘grass roots’ organisations as well as national organisations (Wellington focus group). Some Maori participants commented that Maori women gather most of their information from other Maori women and that many do not know how to access information when required and will not enquire further if it requires travel, cost and/or leaving children (Wellington focus group). Other suggestions made for disseminating information was to link up with TPK (Christchurch) to be included in their mailout to South island Iwi (Christchurch focus group), the Ministry to participate in youth expos and to run more education programmes with specific Iwi (Gisborne focus group). Pacific Island participants also made suggestions about disseminating information to Pacific Island people. Many suggested that we start by focusing on church groups (Wellington and Christchurch focus groups). Others suggested specific Pacific Island associations (such as the Cook Island Association in Porirua, Nuie associations in the Wellington area, Pacific Island Fanau in Christchurch and Nelson, Pacific Island Resource Centres) and meeting Pacific Island media representatives (Auckland focus group). Most of the Pacific Island participants considered that Pacific Island radio, television and newspapers were a very effective way to reach Pacific Island people (Wellington, Christchurch and Auckland focus groups). Conclusion The focus groups were a useful way to brief and seek feedback from key community and agency representatives. This is particularly true for reaching Maori and Pacific Island communities compared with the poor return rate of questionnaires that were sent by the Community Impact team last year. Prepared by: Lesa Kalapu 7 July 1997