Te Kōkiringa Taumata I The New Zealand Planning Institute is an incorporated society and is governed by its constitution. Our full members are collectively recognised as working to a professional standard, underpinned by a common code of ethics.
In accordance with the NZPI constitution, the immediate past Chair of NZPI’s Board automatically serves as Chair of NZPI’s Professional Standards Committee (PSC). As Karyn Sinclair transitions out of the role it seemed timely to look at the PSC, why NZPI has one, what it means and the value it adds to our profession and the clients and communities we work with.
Having a formal process for grievances, disputes, complaints and discipline makes NZPI distinct from many professional interest groups. The process embeds the expectation of professionalism and ethical standards within our membership, and it provides for a formal consideration and resolution in relation to our practice and behaviour as professionals .
NZPI’s constitution (s12) sets out the dispute procedures, which are designed to “enable and facilitate the fair, prompt and efficient resolution of grievances and complaints”. On receipt of a formal complaint, the first stage is for the PSC to consider whether there is a case to answer and ask the member to provide a summary of their position. If the PSC determine there is a case to answer, there is a process through to a determination, and if appropriate penalties.
The value in the PSC process is that it allows a complaint to be considered against our professional standards as planners and not against the expectations of other participants in the process. Karyn says that over her term she has predominantly seen complaints come out of members of the public unhappy with outcomes such as resource consent decisions that went against the advice of a planner or decisions made by planners acting as independent commissioners. She has never had a
complaint relating to behaviours such as bribery, although she does not consider such a charge to be inconceivable. Karyn observes that our Full Members work to a high ethical and professional standard, with only a handful of complaints made annually, and the majority of those found to be without merit.
Karyn believes that conduct around being a member of the Institute is not just about maintaining high individual ethical standards, but it also protects the integrity of the NZPI brand that our 3,000 members have to fall back on.
She says it’s important to remember that the PSC process is not about planning outcomes, but about how we have conducted ourselves as professionals in a professional capacity. Many complaints appear to want to use the PSC process as an alternative to a judicial review or to challenge an outcome from a resource consent application so part of the role of the PSC is to ensure that the complaints process is independent to the Resource Management Act and other legislation we operate in.
Karyn says the constitution has a sensitive process for hearing and resolving disputes. This means that once the PSC has resolved there is a ‘case to answer’ under the current constitution it’s not heard about again, including not publishing complaint outcomes.
Whilst it is important that the privacy of Planners in the complaints process is protected, Karyn believes there is a case to be made that the Institute members should know that the PSC is active and is working to protect the reputation of NZPI and its members.
She supports measures by the NZPI’s Board that focus on being more transparent and with closer engagement with members about the PSC process. This opens up an opportunity for more work to be done to enable the process to become more fit for modern day expectations of transparency without undermining the reputation of those who may come under the scrutiny of the PSC.
The end of Karyn’s term as a member of the PSC has been busy with heavy workloads and an increasing recognition of mental health as a factor to be considered. She’s enjoyed her time working alongside CEO David Curtis, Reg and Megan, and we thank Karyn for her enormous contribution to the planning profession in Aotearoa New Zealand.
