Page 2092 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 22 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
parliament, where ordinary initiatives are the substance of the first appropriation bill and new initiatives and capital works are the subject of a different bill? Would this help to identify and focus on the discretionary issues rather than intermingling the expenditure proposals? Again, the committee expresses no clear view on this issue, but rather offers it as an issue that the Assembly should consider.
The committee made a further 46 recommendations, including:
additional information to be included in budget papers such as agency workforce employment and diversity data and a new chapter addressing annual updates on the strategic direction for the ACT economy to achieving zero net target emissions by 2050;
improvements to accountability indictors and strategic indicators across a number of agencies;
requirement for departments to undertake energy efficiency audits and to work to a set carbon budget;
building growth funding into mental health and disability funding in line with annual growth rates;
the development of specific accountability issues for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people;
improvements to the ACT government ICT system; and
increased funding for the Human Rights Commission to enable it to meet its operational requirements.
The role of the estimates committee is to evaluate expenditure proposals and revenue measures. The committee looks to promote value for money, ensure economy, efficiency and effectiveness and prevent waste and mismanagement. The review of the budget estimates is intended mainly to deal with the future, whereas review of annual reports involves the evaluation of past conduct. However, it must be said that the scope of estimates committees has expanded significantly over the last 40 years; so much so that accountability for past conduct takes up a significant part of the estimates hearings. Again this year, the committee has identified many real problems and shortcomings in the budget estimates that should be addressed.
On the topic of the estimates process, Paul Thomas, in a paper published in the Australian Journal of Public Administration last year entitled “Parliamentary scrutiny of government performance”, observed:
It would be naive to expect senators to approach the review of estimates and annual reports as an objective search for the truth about performance and how it might be improved.
I think this is something that we should all reflect on. I am sure all of us agree that there is a problem that independent observers are making this type of observation. On
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video