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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (29 June) . . Page.. 2209 ..

Schedule 1-Appropriations

Proposed expenditure-Part 3-Chief Minister's, $68,275,000 (net cost of outputs), $10,392,000 (capital injection) and $4,637,000 (payments on behalf of the territory), totalling $83,304,000.

Debate resumed from 28 June 2000.

MR SPEAKER: Standing order 180 sets down the order in which this bill will be considered; that is, in the detail stage, any schedule expressing the services for which the appropriation is to be made must be considered before the clauses and, unless the Assembly otherwise orders, the schedules will be considered by proposed expenditure in the order shown. I remind members that we have previously agreed to consider schedule 1 by part, appropriation unit and departmental totals, then the clauses prior to schedule 2 and the title.

MS TUCKER (10.57): I will be speaking to Chief Minister's and also Treasury and Infrastructure. Chief Minister's objectives are supposedly to represent the corporate leadership or key policy platform of this government. As a Greens member, I have a responsibility to examine whether the social and environmental issues are integrated adequately into the economic policies of this government. In my time in this Assembly, particularly through committee work, I have had the opportunity to work with the community sector on issues related to those who are less well off in our community. I have, of course, also closely monitored the government's environmental programs and policy.

Looking at the objectives of Chief Minister's, it is clear that there is a problem. The key result areas listed refer to online transactions, a more contestable public sector, civic pride and strengthening the economy by attracting business and tourism and making Canberra an IT leader. The key result areas in the government plan go a bit wider, but the overall impression one gets is that the areas chosen have been the result of a random and reactive process. The result is pedestrian and minimalist. Of course, we do see in the highlights a reference to enhancing Canberra's social capital, although we do not see a description or detail of a cohesive policy approach as to how this will be achieved. We see a commitment to a more focused approach to policy development and outcome assessment of government performance, an admission that a less than focused approach has been a feature of past years, something I am in total agreement with and have pointed out many times.

Yesterday the Chief Minister explained how essential it is to have a central policy focus, something else I have been suggesting every year I have been here. However, despite its existence now, I see very little improvement in cross-department collaboration or cross-portfolio collaboration at the ministerial level. This is a problem for all governments, but I think it is most likely because none of them have an overarching framework which embodies the principles of good governance. Such principles surely, as a minimum, should include issues of process, such as inclusion and participation of the community, as well as principles to ecological sustainability and equity. This government has this

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