Page 2132 - Week 07 - Thursday, 29 June 2023

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


It is not the only area, Ms Clay, where there are very large corporates that make it almost impossible for other competitors to grow to a sufficient size. Our banking contract would be in the top 10 in Australia, in terms of its value, particularly in the public sector. Aside from the commonwealth and the six states—and we would probably be on par with Tasmania—there is not going to be many bigger contracts. The services that we require essentially can only be delivered by one of the big four.

Government—human resources and information management system

MR CAIN: My question is to the Special Minister of State. According to your response to question on notice 1146, the ACT public service has spent $31,200,372 towards the program on staffing; the HRIMS program spent that much money on staffing, labour hire, hospitality and advertising.

Why was the ACT public service spending money on hospitality and advertising for development of a failed HR and payroll system?

MR STEEL: I will take the question on notice, but I assume it is in relation to advertising for roles. It was a large program. There were large numbers of staff working on this program. I will come back on notice with some more information.

MR CAIN: Minister, could you detail what was wrong with the previous HR system that it was so necessary to spend, and spend badly, $76 million on this new one?

MR STEEL: I think that was previously outlined by the Auditor-General in a report that they handed down previously on the existing services. They are aging platforms. The reality with ICT systems is that they only last for a period of time. They need to be upgraded for a range of difference reasons: whether it be for cybersecurity reasons; whether it is improved functionality and making sure that we deliver an efficient range of HR services, payroll services and learning management services.

That was what was being attempted to be achieved through the HRIMS system and solution. Now we are looking at pursuing a different approach, which is to upgrade the existing systems to their latest version, which will address many of the issues that I just mentioned, while also being at less risk and less cost to the territory.

MR PARTON: Minister, how and why is it so difficult to deliver a human resources system, when most companies and governments in the country have functioning systems?

MR STEEL: I thank the member for his question. Even a basic Google search about payroll systems would lead him to see several articles about previous difficulties that governments have had in implementing payroll systems across government. It is a challenge, particularly when you are looking at delivering a shared service through a single, integrated human resource management system. Indeed, I believe Tasmania is currently in the process of also looking at upgrading their system in relation to using the SAP SuccessFactors platform, and they may be experiencing some issues as well.

A range of different governments in the past have tried and been challenged by the complexity and the scale of having to translate so many different bespoke business


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video