AI governance for NZ government agencies under the Public Service AI Framework.
We work with central government departments, Crown entities, and local councils on AI governance under the Public Service AI Framework, the Algorithm Charter for Aotearoa New Zealand, Government Procurement Rules, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations.
Built for
What your agency walks away with.
Full engagement methodologyFramework implementation plan
A phased roadmap mapped to your agency's AI maturity, with gap analysis against the Public Service AI Framework and the Algorithm Charter.
AI procurement evaluation criteria
Supplier scorecards, due-diligence checklists, AI-specific contract clauses, and exit-strategy templates aligned with Government Procurement Rules.
Treaty-aligned governance
Iwi and hapū engagement frameworks, cultural impact assessment templates grounded in te ao Māori, and kaitiakitanga embedded in policy.
Audit-ready evidence pack
Documentation Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, or an Office of the Auditor-General review can work through.
The framework exists. The implementation gap is real.
Agencies have the guidance from digital.govt.nz and the OECD AI Principles that underpin it. What they lack are the operational tools to put it into practice across procurement, risk management, and day-to-day use of AI.
- 01Procurement gap
AI procurement without AI-specific criteria.
Government Procurement Rules require assessment of supplier reputation, pricing, supply chain risks, and privacy and security posture. The Responsible AI Guidance for GenAI adds expectations around data traceability and exit strategies. The Algorithm Charter commits agencies to transparency. Without AI-specific evaluation criteria aligned to these commitments, procurement teams are guessing.
Build procurement evaluation criteria - 02Risk gap
Risk registers not designed for algorithmic harm.
The Public Service AI Framework calls for proportionate risk management. Most agency risk registers were not designed for algorithmic bias, model drift, or third-party AI dependencies. AI-specific risk categories need to be layered onto existing processes, aligned with OECD AI Principles on robustness, security, and accountability.
Develop AI risk assessment capability - 03Constitutional obligation
Te Tiriti without AI-specific guidance.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi requires government agencies to protect Māori interests. When AI systems process Māori data, affect Māori communities, or inform decisions with Treaty implications, generic frameworks fall short. The principle of kaitiakitanga demands that Māori data sovereignty be built in from the start, not bolted on.
Integrate Treaty-compliant governance - 04Active
Algorithm Charter commitments not yet operationalised.
The Algorithm Charter for Aotearoa New Zealand commits signatory agencies to transparency, partnership with communities, and meaningful human oversight. Translating that into algorithm registers, public-facing explanations, and review pathways takes process work, not just policy text.
Public Service AI Framework programme
The PolyGovern tracks that apply to government.
Three practice tracks built around the Public Service AI Framework, the Algorithm Charter, and Te Tiriti obligations. Each engagement closes with a documented evidence pack.
Track A
Governance and strategy
Public Service AI Framework operating models, Algorithm Charter implementation, and AI policy tied to Cabinet expectations and Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission scrutiny.
Track B
Assessment and assurance
Risk assessment, AI impact analysis, and supplier due diligence aligned with Government Procurement Rules and the Responsible AI Guidance for GenAI.
Track C
Compliance and advisory
Privacy Act 2020 alignment, Māori data governance practice grounded in kaitiakitanga, AI literacy across the workforce, and standing advisory support for cross-agency programmes.
Across every level of NZ government.
Each level of government carries different governance pressure. Central departments answer to Cabinet and Te Kawa Mataaho. Crown entities operate inside their own statutes. Councils answer to ratepayers and mana whenua.
Central government departments
Ministries and departments with direct Cabinet accountability. Public Service AI Framework, Algorithm Charter commitments, and all-of-government procurement obligations all apply.
Local government and councils
Auckland Council, Wellington City Council, and regional councils deploying AI for resource consenting, transport planning, and citizen services, with accountability to ratepayers and mana whenua.
Crown entities and SOEs
Te Whatu Ora (Health New Zealand), education institutions, and state-owned enterprises building AI governance inside their sector-specific statutes, from the Health Information Privacy Code to education standards.
Common questions from government agencies.
Is the Public Service AI Framework mandatory?
The framework is guidance, not regulation. Cabinet expectations, Ministerial oversight, the Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission, and public accountability mean agencies are expected to follow it. The Responsible AI Guidance for GenAI strengthens these expectations for generative AI. We build governance that is proportionate to the agency's AI maturity.
How does the Algorithm Charter for Aotearoa affect our agency?
The Charter commits signatory agencies to algorithm transparency, meaningful community engagement, and human oversight. These commitments need to be reflected in your AI governance documentation, procurement evaluation criteria, and public communications. Non-signatory agencies face the same public benchmark.
What are our Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations for AI?
When AI processes data about Māori, informs decisions affecting Māori communities, or is deployed in contexts with Treaty implications, agencies need to ensure Māori data sovereignty and kaitiakitanga are respected through meaningful partnership with iwi and hapū, not consultation as a checkbox.
How do we coordinate AI governance across multiple agencies?
Cross-agency AI projects, shared platforms, and all-of-government procurement arrangements need shared risk-assessment standards, data-sharing protocols, vendor-management responsibilities, and clear accountability for outcomes. Without explicit coordination, each agency builds its own approach.
What should an AI exit strategy look like?
The Public Service AI Framework and Government Procurement Rules both emphasise exit planning. You need to be able to retrieve your data, switch vendors without service disruption, and retain ownership of fine-tuned models or training data. Exit strategy is defined before contract signing.
The framework is published. We help your agency operationalise it.
Book an implementation workshop to map the Public Service AI Framework and the Algorithm Charter to your agency's procurement pipeline, risk appetite, Te Tiriti obligations, and existing governance structures.