Governing the City State - Chief Minister and Treasury Directorate ...

The Social Compact establishes a Joint Community Government Reference Group to overseethe ongoing development of relationships and relevance of the document as thoserelationships evolve.ACTCOSS notes in its Submission:Even though the ACT Government has expressed a commitment to the Social Compact, thereis a lack of consistency in its implementation across government. While the intention is clear,that all departments are to frame their work with the community sector with the compact inmind, they do it with different understandings and different resources …The biggest concern about the ACT Social Compact expressed by the community sector is thelack of any enforcement mechanism. The Australia Institute recommends that in order to besuccessful a Compact must include penalties. However the ACT Compact contains no meansof redress when a decision fails to meet the undertakings or reflect the values contained in theCompact. …Despite the good intentions of the ACT Social Compact outlined in the shared vision andprinciples, ACTCOSS is concerned by the lack of detailed guidance in how to implement thecommitments and goals. Consultation participants for the ‘No Wrong Doors’ report indicatedthey were unclear as to how to utilise the Social Compact, although many felt they should betrying to do something with it and were looking for a way to engage with the document …Although a joint community and government reference group has been established, there islittle opportunity for input from the community more generally, nor are documents publishedand made available to the community on the implementation and use of the Compact. The UKGovernment produces an annual review document that is tabled in Parliament. This is animprovement on the ACT process as the tabled review is a public document, ensuring ahigher level of transparency and accountability. 211Focusing on ClientsIn her Submission to the Review, Ms Irene Simkin, underscoring the need for client-focussedservice delivery models and effort involved if the ACTPS is to serve the customers of itsservices, suggested DHCS “requires an urgent overhaul. There are so many sections in thisdepartment, with each one dealing with its own little area, and there appears to be no cooperationor co-ordination between these sections”. 212 The particular circumstances of herdealings with DHCS are beyond the scope of this Review, but these observations are areminder to all ACTPS staff of the expectation – rightly – that when citizens interact with theACTPS, they do so on the basis that they will deal with it once and the response will be aboutthem, and not the organisational units with which they happen to be speaking. The “nowrong door”, client centred approach is difficult to deliver, but provides outstanding serviceto clients.211 Submission No.19 .212 Submission No.4. Ms Irene Simkin.Administrative Arrangements Changes: 158