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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 7 Hansard (1 July) . . Page.. 1930 ..

MS CARNELL: We could flog assets. There you are; Mr Quinlan has got it in one, Mr Speaker - flog assets; Mr Quinlan's approach to the problem.

Mr Moore: We know Mr Quinlan personally would have been happy to flog assets.

MS CARNELL: Yes. I know he would have been, yes. Mr Speaker, such an option, as I mentioned earlier, is not in line with the Assembly's long-term responsibilities. I am sure that this Assembly does not want that, either.

Mr Speaker, with that backdrop, the Government cannot agree with a number of recommendations in the committee's report. Nevertheless, the Government has agreed in full, in part or in principle with the majority of the committee's recommendations. The Government's position on each of the committee's recommendations is detailed in the response and it would not be possible for me to dwell on the 68 recommendations that the Government has responded to. However, I do wish to speak about recommendations 2 and 22 in the committee's report.

Recommendation 2 asks the Government to develop a strategic social plan for the ACT to be used to target and address the continuing deterioration in social conditions and in the provision of social services, and that the plan be used in developing the guidelines for budget priorities and goals and assessing those goals against other financial measures. Yes, Mr Speaker, that is what it says. Recommendation 22 asks that the Government bring to the Assembly for its consideration a separate document outlining the Government's proposal for a strategic plan for Canberra. Mr Speaker, I think I have adequately addressed the alleged, but unsubstantiated, continuing deterioration in social conditions, but may I make a comment there. I think it is quite inappropriate in Assembly committee reports to make sweeping statements with absolutely no information or no facts to back them up. The committees would not accept that from government; nor should this Assembly accept it from committees.

In relation to the strategic and social plan, perhaps I should outline the Government's strategic planning framework. We have a much more dynamic and comprehensive approach to strategic planning than the 1960s and 1970s models, which relied on a single, static, blueprint document. The approach that the Government has taken operates at three levels. Strategic planning sets out the Government's longer-term vision for a clever, caring community. The Government's plan provides outcomes and key result areas - KRAs - to be achieved within its term to support that vision. Then, Mr Speaker, the annual budget process sets out the specific outputs and performance measures which will contribute to the desired outcomes and KRAs.

The strategic planning framework provides the overarching context within which agencies develop major sectoral strategic plans, including Territory planning, environment, housing, education, law and justice, health, IT and multimedia. Many of these strategic plans are already in place or are in the process of being developed. Much work is done to ensure that community views and aspirations are taken into account in the development of these plans through consultation with the community and the relevant customer base. Often there are a number of consultation phases to these plans.

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