Due to New Zealand’s geographic distance from other countries, Kiwis developed a DIY attitude in the days when trading was difficult. As a result, some remarkable inventions were created. In 2006, New Zealand even ranked fourth in the world for patents filed in proportion to gross domestic product.  
 
Unfortunately, this tendency to invent new things has also extended to successive governments – they just can’t stop creating new portfolios! 
 
New Zealand has 81 portfolios, 28 ministers, and 43 central government organisations (public service departments, departmental agencies, and non-public service departments). Comparing New Zealand to other countries with similar populations shows how extreme this is. Norway (5.5 million) has just 20 portfolios, 20 ministers, and 17 departments. Ireland (5.3 million) only has 18 portfolios, 15 ministers, and 18 departments.  
 
A large executive is expensive. As outlined in Max Salmon’s research, 'When there are more ministers, governments tend to spend more, run larger deficits, generate higher revenues, increase transfers, spend more on government wages, and rely more on labour taxes.’. Because, while each minister benefits from spending in their area, political costs are shared through the doctrine of collective cabinet responsibility. As the burden of fiscal responsibility is diluted, New Zealand’s 28 ministers compete for a larger share of the budget without bearing full individual responsibility for subsequent deficits.  
 
Many of New Zealand’s departments are overseen by several ministers. More ministers oversee the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) than Ireland has in total. If the actions, successes, and failures of departments are the responsibility of multiple ministers, to whom are they truly accountable?  
 
Some portfolios even span multiple departments. Where inter-departmental approvals are required for policy initiatives, efficiency is thereby reduced, increasing costs and the risk of delays. 
 
A streamlined system must be established with clear lines of accountability and faster implementation. New Zealand should align its bureaucratic structure more closely to Norway’s, requiring many portfolios to be merged, and the number of ministers reduced.   
 
Portfolios with similar responsibilities could easily be merged. For example, there could be Ministries of Defence and Veterans, Housing and Building and Construction, and Environment and Climate Change Issues. Consolidating portfolios would reduce bureaucratic hurdles and conflicts between ministers holding similar portfolios, encouraging efficiency and cost reduction.  
 
In an upcoming report, the Initiative will outline in more depth how New Zealand can reap the benefits of heightened efficiency and cost reductions. Just think of all the apples and Marmite sandwiches that could be purchased for school lunches from these newfound savings!