Page 3042 - Week 07 - Thursday, 30 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
use of manufacturing is at least 50 per cent of that of use. So what sort of example is the government setting for other agencies and for the wider Canberra community? To simply replace the entire set of equipment because it is cheaper to send staff only once seems to be absurd. It is a serious oversight, but it is one I am glad to see that the government has acknowledged in its response to the estimates committee recommendations.
The argument that it is cheaper on the basis of staff time also seems flawed. InTACT officers already come and go into agencies to fix existing equipment. Why can’t this existing service simply be extended to replacing equipment when it wears out? Equally, keyboards and screens are things which these days are simply replaced by users. Most of us can manage to plug the USB plug in for our new screen. Also, could any still serviceable equipment that is removed from ACT government agencies be passed on to charity groups in the region? There is a lot of it that is still usable.
I am heartened, however, to find that the government have taken notice of some of these concerns in their response to the estimates recommendations. They have agreed to review their current four-year wholesale replacement model, including exploring options to retain equipment that is still working satisfactorily. They have also agreed to consider environmental whole-of-life costs as part of this. The question really is why this was not already happening, given that the government have made at least written commitments to green ICT initiatives. It is something I have been talking about for years, and I just do not understand why the government have not already done it. Those were recommendations 51, 52 and 53.
Going to recommendation 54 of the estimates committee, this is another one which I have been banging on about for all the time that I have been here, and I am very glad that finally the government has agreed that Shared Services ICT will include investigation of a thin client computing model as part of our ongoing strategic planning activities.
I know that, last time we had a discussion about this, the ICT people were of the belief that their network was not up to it, and I hope that this will not be the excuse again. They simply appear not to have looked at the issues involved and the potential serious cost savings.
As I have previously raised, the commonwealth government Australian national audit report on sustainability in ICT practices reported that zero or thin client trials had indicated power savings of up to 83 per cent. In the context of the ACT government’s commitment to 40 per cent greenhouse gas reductions by 2020, an 83 per cent energy use saving, which can be done at no additional cost—in fact, a financial saving—is something that I suggest the government should be looking at.
For those of you who do not know what on earth I am talking about with zero or thin clients, you have a screen and a keyboard on your desk, but all the intelligence—all the brain, as it were—is back in a central server. That is a lot easier for IT staff to manage. It is a lot more secure, and it is a lot cheaper because the keyboard and the screen last a lot longer than a central processing unit. It also saves more energy
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video