Page 2621 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am concerned that all the work on triple bottom line accounting of the previous Treasurer and any plans to use sustainability indicators seem to have been lost or put into cryogenic suspension. The government has paid much lip-service to the benefits of triple bottom line accounting practices and the importance of minimising greenhouse gas emissions, but, until it actually bases some concrete actions on the principles that underpin triple bottom line thinking, we will continue to see the continuation of business as usual. But business as usual is a large part of the problem. I urge the Treasurer to issue procurement guidelines that encourage the purchase of products based on environmentally responsible production, distribution and disposal practices. I believe that we could start with the many documents that come to us in this place in large fonts on single-sided paper.
The reality of climate change means that we all have to adjust our behaviour if we are going to minimise the adverse consequences of global warming and loss of biodiversity. Governments are big consumers in their own right, but they also have a role in setting the standards for their own and corporate procurement. Government policy shapes the consumption pattern of households. Since the signing of the US free trade agreement, I am not sure to what extent we are still permitted to base public procurement and spending decisions on social and environmental factors. But to the extent we are so permitted, I urge the government to set an example by buying responsible and buying smart, rather than merely buying cheap.
When the estimates committee asked about the progress towards a triple bottom line reporting model, we were told:
Establishing an effective evaluation framework is an important, ongoing project for Treasury with indicators being developed and refined for use by agencies and to assist the decision-making process within cabinet.
I have been trying for a while to work out what these words say. I have at least ascertained that they were cleverly designed to look impressive but really mean manana—maybe.
There is no need to wait until measures are developed and refined to fit into the performance indicators for public servants. It is not rocket science. The data is out there now. Longitudinal benchmarks are needed to measure such things as rates of suicide, domestic violence and sexual assault, demands for emergency housing and welfare services, mental health statistics, self-reported happiness surveys, standards of public health and education and environmental measures to gauge the health of ACT habitats, as well as water quality and surveys of ecosystem indicator species.
The raw data is available. It could be collated with minimal effort before the end of the current calendar year. It just takes commitment to do so. I urge you to stop procrastinating and prevaricating and to develop and refine your indicators in full public view and with full public consultation. We will end up with better indicators and better public acceptance of the behavioural changes that are required if we are to pass on a healthy planet to future generations. This goes for almost any area of public policy. Let the community into the decision-making process at a stage when the plans are in flux. May I take my second 10 minutes, please?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .