Page 4262 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 22 September 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Without in any sense in fact derogating from the essential nature of the motion, the motion proposes amendments just to paragraph (2) of the motion, to clarify that the motion really is about ICT. It clarifies that the government is in the process of developing a draft ICT strategy, which will be available in coming months—within the next few months. It is work that we have been doing.
I have outlined, too, all the other significant work which the government have done in relation to ICT as a major provider and the seriousness with which we take issues around the use of power and sustainability and reduction of waste—the steps we have taken, that we have in place. We are working incrementally but we have made very significant gains in each of these areas. I hope that members do acknowledge the very significant work that InTACT has done. But we cannot do everything at once; we need to do these things incrementally as resources permit.
The amendment essentially removes a couple of subparagraphs which I believe to some extent complicate or confuse. I must say that I was not quite sure what the subparagraphs were intended to do or to say. I believe that the motion now, as it stands, with the amendment, if members support it, acknowledges in paragraph (1) some simple facts in relation to information and communications technology as applied in the ACT.
Paragraph (2) will note that at this stage we do not know the whole-of-government ICT energy use for the ACT. We are putting in place the capacity to determine that in the future; we are doing that work. We do not have an ACT sustainability plan, but I think it would be appropriate for the Assembly to acknowledge that we are working on it—that we have a draft, a draft that has not yet been submitted to cabinet and approved as a draft, a draft on which we would consult. We have done the work; there is a preliminary draft. I think it would be appropriate, whilst acknowledging that we do not have it developed, to acknowledge that at least we are on the path to getting one and we accept the importance of it.
Paragraph (3), which we are prepared to accept, calls on the government to commit to measuring ICT involvement impact, and we are seeking to do that. It also calls on the government to expedite the sustainability plan. We are doing that as resources permit. Certainly it is an important piece of work, and I am advised that it is something we will have in coming months.
Then it calls on the government to commit to a number of other things, including the Australian government’s quick wins paper. It also includes making data available, and of course we will do that. It includes developing a policy that will encourage appropriate telecommuting and teleconferencing, which we are doing. We are working on it actively; it is something that all departments are conscious of. And it includes reporting back by March next year on all these issues. I do hope that by then we will indeed have a policy.
So the government is more than happy to acknowledge, as Ms Le Couteur seeks to do through her motion, that this is indeed an important matter with important issues around the use of power and sustainability and important issues in relation to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video