Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (6 May) . . Page.. 980 ..

We have seen further radical changes to the Public Service, both locally and federally. I was interested last week to be at the ACTCOSS conference. The Council of Social Service had as a major theme of its conference the changes to governance in this country. I think it is an indication of the seriousness with which the community sector particularly is regarding these changes and the impact that such changes will have on social justice and, I would argue, also on environmental issues.

We have had downsizing from the local government and the Federal Government. Once again, this is part of the ideology. You see more research being done on the impact of that. I notice that there was one study by Professor Littler, from the University of Southern Queensland, showing that one-third of organisations which had been downsized reported that productivity had improved, one-third reported no change and one-third experienced a deterioration in productivity.

We have outsourcing, which is the way, obviously, that this Government and the Federal Government think we should go - once again, without any real examination of the underlying issues. This was a major theme of the ACTCOSS conference. We have the issues of contracts, specifying services, and what happens when you bring a competitive environment to service provision. There is a downside to it. We asked the Auditor-General, "Has there been a cost-benefit analysis done of the purchaser-provider split?". He was concerned as well and said no; but obviously there is an area that needs to be investigated there.

The outsourcing of information technology by the Federal Government that is occurring right now in Canberra will not necessarily benefit Canberra at all. People are concerned. I understand that there is actually a protest going on this morning at Acton Peninsula because the contract for the demolition of the old Canberra Hospital has been given to a group in Newcastle. The local workers, understandably, are very concerned about that. Federally, you can get to the point where, for example, with information technology, the work will not even be done in Australia. Obviously, the servicing of hardware would stay around Canberra or wherever the business was; but the processing of the data could occur anywhere offshore. The governments, local and Federal, keep promising us the benefits of their ideology; but we need to have a proactive understanding and a proactive strategy to deal with the downside of these changes to the public sector and how government works. We do not see that that is evident, locally or federally.

Liberal governments have been very quick to overthrow a basic Westminster tradition, and I am very concerned about the rationale, or lack of rationale, behind it: Market principles will rule; small government is good government; the private sector can do everything more efficiently. The problem with this is that, unless there is a strong ethic of service to the community and commitment to long-term goals and the long-term welfare of the community and the environment, then we are failing. We cannot forget that the bottom line of the private sector is to maximise profit. We cannot ignore the role that the Public Service has traditionally held in the Westminster system. While it may have been seen to be obstructive to political leaders on occasions, it has also been a leveller of those political leaders' ideas. It has been a place where knowledge has accumulated and has been available to governments.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .