Page 1245 - Week 04 - Thursday, 4 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
While the sociodemographic profile in the territory, with fewer smokers, fewer obese men and women and higher socioeconomic status, would suggest that our service needs should be relatively lower than average, expenditure on services has in fact been higher than average. Too often, I think, governments have been inclined to equate that higher expenditure with the admittedly excellent health, educational and other results we enjoy. The question is: can the correlation be made so simply?
Canberra has competitors for people in growth and the immediate region, as well as in other major cities of Australia. It is important that we maintain our competitiveness by setting the territory’s finances on a sustainable footing and by creating the right environment for business to operate and grow. In the preamble to the terms of reference for the functional review, I said
Sound management requires that all government administrative arrangements and programs be reviewed periodically to ensure that they are effectively meeting their objectives. This also helps ensure that expenditure is targeted at high priority needs and the budget is balanced over time.
I am sure that nobody would argue with balancing budget and targeting expenditure to high priority needs. For the benefit of members, and so that we have a full understanding of its import, I will read out the terms of reference of the review. They are:
Having regard to agreed government priorities the strategic and functional review will:
review the outlook for the ACT budget and identify the major medium term fiscal risks;
undertake a high level benchmarking of government expenditure in the ACT relative to other jurisdictions in Australia, drawing on available data (including data published by the Commonwealth Grants Commission and the Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision);
consider all major areas of government expenditure and identify programs that could be delivered more efficiently or could be scaled back to more effectively meet whole of government objectives;
identify options to improve efficiently through more effective structures for government operations;
make recommendations on specific options for reducing expenditures or increasing non-taxation revenues.
The terms of reference are about improving the effectiveness of the structures for government operations. They are about improving the efficiency of government programs, maintaining and improving services to the community and setting the territory’s finances and services on a sustainable footing. If they are about this year and next year, they are particularly and specifically also about the future.
Any review that improves the efficiency and effectiveness of the public sector, its structures and its services will have benefits for business and the wider community. The
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .