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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 12 Hansard (24 November) . . Page.. 3569 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

the day was frustrated. In other words, public servants were an easy target. The task force came up with four general failings of the Commonwealth Public Service which I could summarise into one simple phrase: That the service was generally cautious in its approach. The task force preferred to refer to the service as being arrogant, insensitive, indifferent and stubborn and recommended five actions to prevent such attitudes, three of which are relevant to this debate. They were:

In other words, the push is on for senior public servants to think and act outside the box. In theory, senior officials with this quality would be identified and employed on a performance-based contract with an increase in salary as an incentive, with more of the responsibility for actions of the department being transferred from the Minister to themselves. If things went well, the Minister would still be able to take the credit as in the good old days. When things went wrong, it was "goodbye public servant", instead of "goodbye Minister". Endorsed by the royal commission, this type of management structure is becoming entrenched in senior levels of all public services in Australia, including the ACT.

I still remember, Mr Speaker, being somewhat bewildered - the bewildered new kid on the block - when asked to support such a change for our Public Service in 1995. My staff and I had the usual briefings, did our research, and, after consideration, the theory seemed sound, and I gave it support. It is a fine theory, but with hindsight, Mr Speaker,

I can see that in practice it just has not worked. In fact, it has been an unmitigated disaster. And I regret ever supporting this change, cleverly disguised at the time as reform, when in fact it was just a change which has underpinned the incompetence of both the failed hospital implosion and the vagaries of the Bruce Stadium redevelopment.

In case members think I am being too harsh on our senior public servants, I will refer you to examples from other States, which also now have this type of structure. Firstly, South Australia and the redevelopment of the Hindmarsh Soccer Stadium. I have been following this one, Mr Speaker, for several months as it has such a familiar ring to it. Exchange "Hindmarsh Stadium" with "Bruce Stadium" and the names of local identities involved and I am sure we can all guess the story line. In order to attract Olympic soccer to Adelaide, the South Australian Government set up to spend $8m on upgrading the local sports stadium and ended up spending close to $40m. Some of the reasons for the escalated costs are different to our experience. However, I fully expect that underneath the veneer, and now under the close scrutiny of the South Australian Auditor-General, are several senior public servants who are not prepared to say no.

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