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

needs to be correct and aligned with government policy, but even if the Minister insists onresponding personally, there are better and more efficient ways of doing so.In this Chapter, the Review continues the approach of referring to Directorates within thesingle ACTPS organisation outlined as its preferred model at Chapter 3. It begins with adiscussion of the implementation of the ACT Government’s strategic planning framework,before exploring in more detail the nature of strategic policy advice. After that, the ACTGovernment’s strategic priority setting and resource allocation processes are analysed indetail.The ACT already has sophisticated – some would say over-engineered – frameworks andprocedures to support Cabinet’s decision making, but like any system, they benefit from aperiodic “major service” in which they are pulled apart, worn parts are overhauled, movingparts are lubricated, and operating software is updated.Much of the ACT Government’s strategic planning framework is at the forefront of leadingpractice. The Review has concluded, however, that it could be used and implemented better.Time and effort, along with received historical precedent, has led to organic development ofthe systems currently utilised for priority setting and resource allocation in the ACT. TheReview believes the ACTPS performance in supporting Government decision making, andproviding services to the community, would be significantly enhanced through:• greater alignment and coordination of effort through the “One ACT Government – OneACTPS” model;• a smaller number of clearly enunciated strategic Government priorities;• further integration of priority setting and resource allocation processes;• a recalibration and alignment of reporting streams to alleviate the current reportingburden (especially internally) that is a risk to delivery; and• more rigorous enforcement of Cabinet and Budget process discipline and provision ofmore coordinated and comprehensive support by officials to the Budget Committee ofCabinet.In a Government of seven, with a Cabinet of five, there is, on occasion, an overlap betweendecision making by the Cabinet and decision making in the caucus. While this is entirelyproper – the way in which the Cabinet process is used is a matter for the government of theday – reliance on caucus decision making risks the ACTPS being less well aligned with theintended course than if decisions are made in the Cabinet Room.The Vacant Middle GroundThe Canberra Plan enunciates the Government’s strategic and aspirational vision for the city.The ACTPS’s performance in delivering Government priorities might be enhanced ifarticulation of the priorities beneath that overarching vision was clearer, they were fewer inStrategy, Resource Allocation and the Vacant Middle Ground: 205