Dear Editor, Public administration plays a crucial role in safeguarding the interests of both public servants and the broader community, ensuring trust in the management and delivery of state services.

As a dedicated public servant, I was forced out of my role for simply performing my duties – researching and proposing policy reforms that highlighted organisational inefficiencies and opportunities for national growth which were perceived as threats. This led to workplace discrimination and bullying, affirming a culture unwilling to address needed improvements.

Seeking remedy through formal channels, correspondence with the CEO and Board Chair was initiated but encountered continued obstruction and discrimination. Turning to legal recourse, I aimed to utilise accountability mechanisms meant to protect public trust. Unfortunately, this revealed the erosion of public administration where protecting senior officials’ misconduct was prioritised over addressing the misconduct. 

Pursuing legal representation to remedy such situations is costly, and the government agency at hand exploits this by delaying responses to legal correspondence, pushing timeframes to their expiry, and forcing the ex-public servant to finance further steps. This deliberate tactic exhausts funds and silences the issue while protecting senior officials’ misconduct and undermining public confidence. The senior officials at hand should be investigated and performance managed to ensure state services work for the public, not against them. How many others (ex) public servants has this happened to?

Efforts to address misconduct and breaches in policy must be transparent and prompt to restore public trust. Ministers overseeing portfolios must ensure that compliance and ethical conduct is upheld, fostering a safe working environment free from discrimination.

It’s essential for regulatory bodies to uphold accountability and integrity. Any failure to do so raises concerns about protecting public interests and maintaining ethical standards, over the protecting of senior officials who fail to fulfill their duties due to personal biases, inadequate capability and lack of constitutional merit.

Legislation provides a framework of governance and regulatory guidelines essential for transparency and accountability. The Public Service Act’s Code of Conduct ensures public servants uphold their responsibilities effectively. Oversight is critical in maintaining integrity and fairness in state service governance. Who is this “oversight”? Why are legislative processes not reaching their door or are they?

The purpose for seeking remedy through formal channels with the CEO and Board Chair, was to achieve a resolution, which was not actioned. The purpose for pursuing legal recourse was to achieve a resolution of what the Board failed to actively resolve. The purpose for the Board exploiting timeframes to their expiry was to force the issue to be silenced.

What has been learned, is that following the process which is designed for the public to use when raising a concern or grievance, to achieve a resolution which allows you to continue with your livelihood, only lets you to believe that it will work for you, when actually... its design allows for it to be exploited by the other party to silence you and conceal the misconduct. So, the questions now are: if this design is easily exploited, why have the relevant authorities not fixed this? How does the “process” get fixed, so it does work for people to successfully achieve a resolution? And, how transparent will the authorities be with the public to demonstrate that the process has been fixed?

As an ex-public servant, I have not received acknowledgment or compensation for the injustices faced, while those responsible continue in their roles without consequence. Despite following due process, public servants often find themselves unheard and overlooked, in favour of a system that shields misconduct, unregulated interference, and protected mediocrity all to gate-keep remuneration and privilege. This situation undermines the public’s confidence in reporting grievances and seeking justice.

It’s time for the greater public to remind our government that every public servant regardless of role serves the people of the Cook Islands, bound by integrity and duty. If they fail in this duty, the processes of raising grievances should be respected and heard, and the functions of the “oversight authority” should promptly address this to ensure state services work for, and not against the public good.

This story underscores the need for systemic change while not forgetting the dedication of the many public servants who serve with dignity and pride. To the greater public of the Cook Islands, please accept my story as one that hopes for all people to be better looked after.

Ex-public servant

(Name and address supplied)