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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Tuesday, 9 March 2004) . . Page.. 870 ..

more characterised by lame and inadequate responses to things like bushfire warnings, child abuse, student accommodation, planning approval and hospital waiting lists.

The Auditor-General’s report on the effectiveness of annual reporting—report No 1 of 4 March 2003—made some 30 criticisms of the effectiveness of annual reporting arrangements. Of those, 27 were in reference to flaws in the Chief Minister’s directions. These directions set out the detailed requirements for annual reporting; they spell out what the Chief Minister expects from all government agencies in their annual reports.

It seems that the Chief Minister does not expect very much, and that is what he gets. What we have here is a lack of leadership and no sense of purpose. What we have here is a chief minister who does not understand the principles of public administration and lacks the leadership skills to set standards and articulate what he expects. His inability to set goals and inspire people to achieve them is reflected in poor accountability. He is failing to lead.

So it is hardly surprising that the Auditor-General has made over 30 recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the Chief Minister’s directions. Some of the good ideas for improvement include: reporting on factors which prevent agencies from achieving their objectives and targets; providing an assurance that all material information on the operations of each agency has been included in its annual report; policy level guidance on performance measures; helpful information to stakeholders; information on the board members, their quality, experience and other business interests; a mandatory and standardised reporting format; and a compliance index so that meaningful comparisons can be made.

But, Mr Speaker, did the Chief Minister act on these recommendations? No, he did not. Does he understand their importance? Apparently not. Has he done anything for greater accountability? I do not think so. Has he done anything to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public sector administration? No. Has he failed to set standards for accountability and provide leadership? Well, arguably yes, but maybe not.

All he did was pick up some procedural recommendations, such as the one for a single reporting time—a marginal simplification and improvement—but nobody expects that that will fundamentally improve the usefulness of annual reporting process. As if to underscore the extent to which the Chief Minister fails to understand his role in setting standards and directions for annual reports, his main preoccupation is that agencies should report on their compliance with the Human Rights Act.

Because of the failure of the Chief Minister both to understand his role and to pick up the recommendations of the Auditor-General, we will be supporting the amendment requiring the minister to consult with the Public Accounts Committee on annual reports directions and to have regard to Public Accounts Committee recommendations.

Mr Speaker, whilst we will be supporting this amendment, I draw members’ attention to the Auditor-General’s recommendation that the PAC should actually approve ministerial directions—that is, the Auditor-General says Public Accounts Committee approval should be mandatory. In the light of the Chief Minister’s performance up to now, I do have concerns that it may not be sufficient merely to require the minister to have regard

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