1. Introduction
2. Methodology and format of report
3. Nature of the Review
4. The Nature of the Problem
5. Context and Scope of Decision-making

C. NATURE OF THE REVIEW

3.1    It is essential, at the outset, to define the nature of the review. This can best be done by describing what it is and what it is not.

3.2    It is an organisation review which is to say that it is concerned with the origins, objectives and performance of DWI as an agency of Government. The purpose of the review is to examine the reasons for the establishment of DWI, whether it has achieved the objectives set for it, what issues have arisen in the first 18 months of its existence and what adjustments may be necessary in the light of the new Government's preferences and directions (from both an owner and a purchaser perspective). The Minister of Social Services and Employment described the review as being tasked with "issuing a warrant of fitness".

3.3    It is not:

1. a review of individual performance or accountability. The Solicitor-General has made it clear that the State Sector Act is explicit in respect of these matters as they apply to Chief Executives and members of the Public Service. Only the State Services Commissioner may review the performance of a chief executive and only a chief executive may review the performance of an individual employee. In the case of DWI, given the active leadership style that has been adopted, it is difficult to separate the person of the chief executive from any consideration of the organisation. Equally, reference has had to be made to senior management: this is not directed at any individual. Consequently, the judgements made in this review should be seen in the wider organisational context described above and should not be seen as a performance assessment either of the chief executive or of any staff member. Those personal judgements are for others to make;

2. a review of welfare or employment policy. At the same time it must be recognised that policy and organisational issues are so entwined that it is not possible to avoid commentary on some aspects of policy, particularly as it affects strategy, capability and performance measurement;

3. a review of particular cases raised by DWI clients. The team has received a great deal of information concerning the difficulties faced by individual clients, particularly as the review coincided with the public outcry over student loans. The team is not in a position to investigate in these cases, this will have to be sought by other means. However, the information itself has been invaluable in providing an insight into the problems encountered by clients as they interact with DWI.

4. a review of student loans and allowances, the Community Employment Group or the Wairakei "charter" incident. While the team has commented on these matters, since they bear directly on the organisation's performance, detailed reports have been or are being prepared by others and it was not thought necessary to duplicate them. However, these reports and the subsequent work on them should be included in the documentation for any follow-up to this review.

3.4    In setting down the limits to this review it is worth noting that inquiries of this kind are normally carried out under the State Sector Act or the Commission of Inquiries Act. In this case Ministers preferred an approach which was more directly tied to their decision-making processes. They may do so in future in other, similar, situations. It would be inappropriate for this review to make any recommendations on the matter but Ministers may want to consider the general questions arising from Ministerial reviews and perhaps include some reference to them in the Cabinet Manual. The essential point is that the limits on a Ministerial review are such that it can be difficult to get to the nub of the problem.