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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (24 June) . . Page.. 1948 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

The Government notes that original past year figures are available in the relevant past-year Budget documents, and that there are logistical reasons and presentational difficulties inhibiting the inclusion of additional information in current Budget documentation.

One is tempted to say, "Yes, Minister" when one reads this sort of language. The point goes on:

The inclusion of an additional column in future Budget papers to provide this information would require a reduction in typesize to fit within the present page format, resulting in difficulty for most readers. Alternatively, the conversion of single page tables from portrait to two-page landscape presentation to accommodate the additional column would generate a significant expansion in the size of Budget Paper 4.

I find that particularly interesting. It is not the response we would expect from that overriding Chief Minister's Department goal - a well-managed public sector with motivated and trained staff to provide responsive services to the ACT community. This is not responsive. This is saying that it is difficult to do, instead of working out how to do it. I draw this to the Chief Minister's attention because I think it is an appalling example of lack of responsiveness when the response was so easy.

Let me demonstrate for you, Chief Minister. Here is the current size budget paper on which we cannot fit an extra column in order to be responsive to the Estimates Committee. Here is 1996-97 Budget Paper No. 2. What happens when you stick one over the other? You notice that, in the current year's budget papers compared to Budget Paper No. 2 from last year, there is room for an extra column. All you had to do was say, "Yes, we will be responsive, in accordance with the overriding conceptual point of the Chief Minister's Department, and maybe we could use a slightly different format". Granted, the box you put things in - and it is a wonderful presentation this year; I found it much better - will have to be another inch, or 2 or 3 centimetres, longer, just enough to take an extra column; but I do not think that is going to cause any big problems on anybody's bookshelf.

We still have a situation where there is often a response, "We cannot do it", as opposed to a responsive approach of, "How shall we go about doing it?". I think this response highlights the particular problem, which still exists. Not only should we say "Agreed in principle" - I take Mr Whitecross's point that it is not enough to say "Agreed in principle" and then go away and do something else - but also "Agreed in fact". It is not difficult to do. I hope we will see an adoption of that kind of approach: How do we go about doing this if we possibly can? The Chief Minister's Department is responsible for setting the tone of the Public Service. I must say, to be fair to the Chief Minister's Department, that there have been many examples where I have seen a quite reasonable response on other things; but it is an excellent example of where we need to improve and how we can improve.

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