Page 3099 - Week 08 - Thursday, 25 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (11:01): The budget process for the Department of the Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water was, I thought, somewhat symptomatic of a new department that was still undergoing some internal processes relating to its establishment. Even the minister acknowledged that there needed to be some work done on the strategic indicators for the new department. I suspect that, as the department finds it feet under the guidance of the chief executive, Mr Papps, there will be increasing clarity on a number of issues surrounding the establishment of programs and accountability measures. But I imagine that it is no mean feat to reorganise a bureaucracy and determine its strategic direction, so I look forward to seeing some of these issues resolved over the year ahead.
I do think that the overarching difficulties with distilling detailed information from the budget papers was especially relevant to this portfolio and, as I said this morning, I would encourage the government to review their response to recommendation 9 in the estimates report and give consideration to how the budget papers could provide further information about programs from year to year.
An example of where there was a lack of continuity between last year’s budget papers and this year’s was the switch your thinking program. I noted that in last year’s budget the switch your thinking program had funding in the outyears to 2012 of just over a million dollars per year. Yet in the estimates committee the minister seemed confused when this information was presented. Instead, he confirmed that the funding for the program would cease at the end of this financial year, which begs the question: what happened to that outyear funding indicated in last year’s budget of $3.4 million? Given that last year’s budget indicated that money had been appropriated, where did it go? Perhaps the old switch your thinking did not include the rebates. Perhaps that money went to some other program.
I note this not to make accusations that the money has not been wisely spent but to highlight how the budget papers are distinctly unclear about what has happened to the programs that are ongoing or have been funded in the previous year’s budget. I do believe this would improve accountability and transparency in the budget process.
In regard to the government’s flagship program this year, the switch your thinking program, I was pleased to see that the government had agreed with recommendation 48 in the estimates report. This recommendation calls on the department to develop and report against indicators which will actually measure energy and water saved and greenhouse emissions reduced. The Greens are pleased that the government has agreed with this recommendation. We have high hopes for this program and are looking forward to seeing it rolled out.
There are a number of things that this program is designed to address—not just energy efficiency but also water efficiency in the home. The intent is to make it easier for Canberrans to put the measures in place to save on both water and energy, something that many of us do not easily get around to doing.
I do want to take a minute, though, to focus in detail on what the government is expecting so far to spend this money on, as during the estimates process we received
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .