Page 2997 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
What capital equipment is required by each?
What specialist skills are required by staff in each, and what are the specialist levels?
The answer came back:
The ACT Government prepares budgets on an outputs basis.
Yes, we know. That is why we asked, “On the basis of these outputs, can you provide us this information?” The answer continued:
Data at that level is published in the Budget Papers—
yes, we just read that—
along with budgeted financial statements for agencies. Similar information—
in fact, almost identical information—
on actual performance is published in annual reports including audited financial statements. Certain figures you request will be publicly available on the LAPS Annual Report—
that is, Land and Property Services, so it is the LAPS annual report—
or are available on ACT Government Budget Papers.
“Certain information, but we’re not going to tell you what it is”—
Data is not available in the form in other questions and at the level of disaggregation requested in other questions without the diversion of significant resources from LAPS ongoing business that I am not prepared to authorize.
So said the Chief Minister. This was repeated over and over again. This is a government who, for any given output class in the budget, cannot or will not tell you what the programs are, how many people are employed, whether they need particular skills, and, if so, what are those particular skills, and whether there is particular capital equipment that they need to run this program. Mr Assistant Speaker, what is the government doing if it cannot, or will not, answer these questions? If it cannot, it is negligent. If it will not, it is in contempt of the Assembly. Either way I will take my second 10 minutes, Mr Assistant Speaker. (Second speaking period taken.)
That was the answer from LAPS. It goes on in different ways and in different forms all the way across. It shows that this minister, this Treasurer, has no idea what is going on in the department. It means that Treasury has no idea. If proposals come up for funding of a particular initiative there is no-one there to say: “I don’t think you need this money to do it. You’ve already got the staff to do it. I don’t think you need this much money.” There does not appear to be anyone in the chain of command under the Treasurer who is prepared to say, “No, this is not a very good idea,” or, “Could we be more prudent with this? Is this a priority? Is this the appropriate priority for the people of the ACT?” These are the questions which have not been asked.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video