Democracy, impartiality and the online political activity of Aotearoa New Zealand’s public sector employees: similarities and differences with other Westminster countries

References

• Armstrong, Sir Robert. 1985. “The Duties and Responsibilities of Civil Servants in Relation to Ministers.” Accessed October 13, 2023. http://www.civilservant.org.uk/library/1996_Armstrong_Memorandum.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, Alison, Nikola Balnave, and Peter Holland. 2018. “‘Utterly Disgraceful’: Social Media and the Workplace.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 77 (3): 492–499. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, Adam M. 2021. “A Manager’s Guide to Free Speech and Social Media in the Public Workplace: An Analysis of the Lower Courts’ Recent Application of Pickering.” Public personnel management 50 (3): 430–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026020954507.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, Gene A. 2003. “Building Social Capital: Civic Attitudes and Behavior of Public Servants.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13 (1): 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mug011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, Amanda, and Benjamin Piper. 2018. “A Legal Framework to Govern Online Political Expression by Public Servants.” Canadian Labour & Employment Law Journal 21 (1): 1–50. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3251375.
   Google Scholar
• Cole, Rose. 2020. “Maintaining Neutrality in the Minister’s Office.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 79 (4): 495–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, Christopher A. 2020. “Public Servants, Anonymity, and Political Activity Online: Bureaucratic Neutrality in Peril?” International Review of Administrative Sciences 86 (3): 496–512. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852318780452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, Christopher A. 2022. “Impartiality and Public Sector Employees’ Online Political Activity: Evidence from Three Australian Elections.” Acta Politica 57 (1): 210–234. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-020-00181-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, Christopher A. 2024. “Public servants’ Political Activity Online in an Institutional Environment of Caution: The Role of Personality Traits.” International Journal of Public Sector Management 37 (2): 255–283. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-10-2023-0294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New York: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlström, Carl, and Victor Lapuente. 2022. “Comparative Bureaucratic Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 25 (1): 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-102543.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, Arnikka MacIntyre. 2002. The Political Neutrality of the New Zealand Public Service. Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington.
   Google Scholar
• Ertas, Nevbahar. 2015. “Political Voice and Civic Attentiveness of Public and Non-Profit Employees.” The American Review of Public Administration 45 (5): 607–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014523117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, Anthony. 2018. “Public Sector Employees and the Freedom of Political Communication.” Alternative Law Journal 43 (1): 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X17748213.
   Google Scholar
• Grube, Dennis C. 2017. “Rules, Prudence and Public Value: Public Servants and Social Media in Comparative Perspective.” Government and Opposition 52 (1): 75–99. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2015.21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grube, Dennis C. 2019. Megaphone Bureaucracy: Speaking Truth to Power in the Age of the New Normal. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halligan, John. 2021. “Politicization of Public Services in Comparative Perspective.” Oxford Research Encyclopaedias. Accessed October 20, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1372.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, Christopher. 2011. The Blame Game: Spin, Bureaucracy, and Self-Preservation in Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, Christopher, and Martin Lodge. 2006. The Politics of Public Service Bargains: Reward, Competency, Loyalty—And Blame. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Institute of Public Administration New Zealand. 2023. “Working in the Public Service Survey 2022.” Accessed October 22, 2023. https://ipanz.org.nz/Story?Action=View&Story_id=150694.
   Google Scholar
• Iosifidis, Petros, and Nicholas Nicoli. 2021. Digital Democracy, Social Media and Disinformation. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson, Willow S., and Shannon Howle Tufts. 2013. “To Post or Not to Post: Employee Rights and Social Media.” Review of Public Personnel Administration 33 (1): 84–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X12443265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kam, Cindy D., and Robert J. Franzese. 2009. Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Li, Yaujun, and David Marsh. 2008. “New Forms of Political Participation: Searching for Expert Citizens and Everyday Makers.” British Journal of Political Science 38 (2): 247–272. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123408000136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May, Kathryn. 2022. “Never Tweet. Social Media Is Complicating the Age-Old Neutrality of the Public Service.” Policy Options. Accessed September 25, 2023. https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/public-service-free-expression/.
   Google Scholar
• McBeth, Mark K., Adam M. Brewer, and Mackenzie N. Smith. 2020. “Teaching Social Media and Public Administration: Applying Four Approaches to an Emerging Issue.” Teaching Public Administration 38 (2): 168–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739419886630.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mutz, Diana C. 2015. In-Your-Face Politics: The Consequences of Uncivil Media. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• New Zealand Parliament. 2023. “Governance and Administration Committee.” Accessed October 10, 2023. https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?ref=watch_permalink&v=430751829250547.
   Google Scholar
• Pauka, Charles. 2017, August 7. “Though Shalt Not Criticise.” Communications. Accessed October 22, 2023. https://www.governmentnews.com.au/though-shalt-not-criticise/.
   Google Scholar
• Pearse, Adam. 2023. “Bosses to Get Reminder on Rules of Impartiality.” New Zealand Herald. Accessed March 9, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Pender, Kieran. 2019. “Comcare V Banerji: Public Servants and Political Communication.” Sydney Law Review 41 (1): 131–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry, James L., and Annie Hondeghem, eds. 2008. Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, B. Guy, and Jon Pierre, eds. 2005. The Politicization of the Civil Service in Comparative Perspective a Quest for Control. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Piatak, Jaclyn Schede. 2015. “Altruism by Job Sector: Can Public Sector Employees Lead the Way in Rebuilding Social Capital?” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25 (3): 877–900. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price, Emma. 2013. “Social Media and Democracy.” Australian Journal of Political Science 48 (4): 519–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2013.846296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Public Service Alliance of Canada. 2015. Backgrounder: PSAC members’ Constitutional Rights to Engage in Political Activity. Accessed October 19, 2023. http://psacunion.ca/backgrounderpsac-members-constitutional-rights.
   Google Scholar
• Public Service Commission of Canada. 2014. Guidance Document for Participating in Noncandidacy Political Activities. Ottawa: Public Service Commission of Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. A. W., John Wanna, and Patrick Weller. 2009. Comparing Westminster. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, B., and Jan Teorell. 2008. “What is Quality of Government? A Theory of Impartial Government Institutions.” Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions 21 (2): 165–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2008.00391.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy, Jeffery. 2013. From Machinery to Mobility: Government and Democracy in a Participative Age. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Savoie, Donald J. 2003. Breaking the Bargain. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sedgwick, Stephen. 2014. “Why Public Servants Should Be Judicious Online.” The Canberra Times. Accessed April 17, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, Richard, and Chris Eichbaum. 2019. “Still Friends? Revisiting New Zealand Public Servants’ Perceptions of Ministerial Advisers.” Political Science 71 (2): 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2020.1742073.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, Thomas B. 1973. “Salient New Zealand Bureaucratic Norms.” Political Science 25 (1): 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/003231877302500103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, Jeannette. 2010. “Public Service Motivation, Civic Attitudes and Actions of Public, Non-Profit and Private Sector Employees.” Public Administration 88 (4): 1083–1098. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01870.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission. 2020. Guidance: Use of Social Media for Public Servants. Wellington: Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission. 2023. General Election Guidance 2023. Wellington: Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Tufts, Shannon Howle, Willow S. Jacobson, and Mattie Sue Stevens. 2015. “Status Update: Social Media and Local Government Human Resource Practices.” Review of Public Personnel Administration 35 (2): 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X14558066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C., and A. Valeriani. 2021. Outside the Bubble: Social Media and Political Participation in Western Democracies. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vaidhyanathan, Siva. 2018. Anti-Social Media: How Facebook Disconnects Us and Undermines Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vowles, Jack. 2000. “The New Zealand Election Study.” Political Science 52 (2): 150–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/003231870005200205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vowles, Jack, Fiona Barker, Mona Krewel, Janine Hayward, Jennifer Curtin, Lara Greaves, and Luke Oldfield. 2022. 2020 New Zealand Election Study. ADA Dataverse, V3. https://doi.org/10.26193/BPAMYJ.
   Google Scholar
• Vowles, Jack, Hilde Coffé, Jennifer Curtin, and Gerard Cotterell. 2014. 2014 New Zealand Election Study. ADA Dataverse, V3. https://doi.org/10.26193/MF9DNL.
   Google Scholar
• Vowles, Jack, Kate McMillan, Fiona Barker, Jennifer Curtin, Janine Hayward, Lara Greaves, and Charles Crothers. 2017. 2017 New Zealand Election Study. ADA Dataverse, V3. https://doi.org/10.26193/28JJFB.
   Google Scholar
• Woodley, Carolyn, and Michel Silverstri. 2014. “The Internet Is Forever: Student Indiscretions Reveal the Need for Effective Social Media Policies in Academia.” American Journal of Distance Education 28 (2): 126–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2014.896587.
   Google Scholar