New Zealand’s public sector is widely trusted for integrity and transparency, but that trust depends on whether organisations can maintain a culture where people feel safe to report wrongdoing, and confident that concerns will be handled properly. The Public Service Commissioner’s “Speaking Up” model standards set out the minimum expectations for how public sector organisations should enable, receive, assess, investigate, and resolve wrongdoing concerns, while protecting the people who raise them from reprisal or other detrimental impacts.
For leaders, risk owners, HR, audit and compliance teams, the document is a practical blueprint. It also makes a clear point that becomes critical when you are designing or reviewing your own whistleblowing arrangements: credibility is everything. If staff do not trust the channel, they do not use it. And where confidence is low, independence becomes a powerful way to restore it.
What the model standards are trying to achieve
The standards focus on three connected outcomes:
- Get the foundations right from the start. Agencies are expected to show visible leadership commitment, build awareness, and provide training so staff understand what to report and how to report it.
- Make sure processes are robust. Concerns must be taken seriously, triaged appropriately (including for potential protected disclosures), and managed with clear roles, accountability, confidentiality safeguards, and timely communication.
- Keep people safe. Agencies must assess risk from the start, provide tailored support, and actively protect people from reprisal, repercussion, or adverse impacts.
This is not just about policy wording. It is about an operating model that people trust.
The key requirements decision-makers should note
1) Multiple reporting channels, including escalation options
The standards expect organisations to offer more than one way to speak up, ranging from informal discussions to formal routes, direct access to the chief executive, and protected disclosure pathways which include the services of external and independent providers, particularly where internal reporting is not safe or has been exhausted.
Practical implication: a single inbox, a single manager, or a single “HR only” pathway is unlikely to meet the spirit of the standards or earn staff confidence.
2) Protected Disclosures Act alignment is not optional
The standards explicitly connect “serious wrongdoing” to the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022 and note extra requirements, including confidential handling and careful safeguarding of the discloser’s identity. They also specify that public sector organisations must have internal procedures that set out how disclosures are received, who can receive them, what protections apply, and that these procedures are widely published and republished.
Practical implication: your internal processes need to work on day one, not when the first disclosure arrives.
3) Impartiality and confidentiality are central
The standards emphasise impartiality as a highest priority and require active steps to protect confidentiality as far as reasonably possible, plus clear communication where confidentiality cannot be fully maintained.
Practical implication: perceived conflicts of interest are as damaging as actual ones. Even a well-run internal process can fail if staff believe it is “not independent”.
4) Timely action and regular updates build trust
People who report concerns should be kept informed at reasonable intervals and generally at least once a month, including when there is no progress to report. Anonymous reporting should also be enabled.
Practical implication: silence erodes confidence quickly. Communication is part of the control, not an optional extra.
5) Skilled, independent investigation capability
Where an investigation is warranted, the standards call for skilled, experienced investigators who are independent from the matter reported, with fair process for those implicated and clear decision-making on findings and outcomes.
Practical implication: “independent from the matter” is a high bar. In smaller organisations, true independence can be difficult to achieve internally.
6) Centralised monitoring, documentation, and governance
Agencies are expected to centrally record reports, track risks and trends, and feed reporting into risk management and assurance structures, supported by training and systems for auditing and continuous improvement.
Practical implication: a speak-up programme must be measurable and governable, not ad hoc.
7) Safety, support, and remediation are ongoing duties
The standards call for early risk assessment, dedicated support people, continued monitoring during and after the process, and remediation where someone has been disadvantaged, including acknowledgements and apologies where appropriate.
Practical implication: the obligation does not end when the investigation report is written.
Why many organisations should consider an external, independent provider
The standards repeatedly come back to confidence, safety, impartiality, confidentiality, and credible handling of sensitive information. These are exactly the areas where internal-only models can struggle, especially when:
- the allegation involves senior leaders, HR, or people in the same reporting line.
- the organisation is small, and independence is difficult to demonstrate.
- staff fear identification or reprisal, even with “confidential” internal processes.
- specialist investigation, triage, or protected disclosure handling capability is limited.
- you need consistent documentation, trend analysis, and governance-ready reporting.
An external, independent New Zealand provider can help by separating the reporting channel from internal politics, providing neutral intake and triage, ensuring disciplined case management and communications, and supporting lawful, careful handling of identity and risk. Done well, this increases trust, lifts reporting rates when needed, and reduces the likelihood that issues fester into larger integrity, legal, or reputational events.
Next step
If your organisation is reviewing its speak-up arrangements, or you are implementing the requirements and want a credible, independent channel that staff will actually trust, talk to Incident Response Solutions.
to learn how an external, independent New Zealand reporting service can support your obligations and strengthen your culture:
Call 0800 WITNESS
Whistleblowers 