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

clearly enunciate policy directions, or perhaps even worse, to articulate directions at manylevels so that all stakeholder groups in the community feel like they are being looked after.Neither of these options makes life easy for public services, but officials must continue toapply their skills and capacities to supporting the government of the day and serving theircommunities. It will always be the case that governments will choose to maintain someflexibility in their priorities and strategic direction – and this is entirely appropriate. Perhapsthe only thing worse than vague priority setting, is rigid and unquestioning adherence to awrong, but clearly stated, goal.In this context, New Zealand’s Review of the Centre rings true:The clearer Ministers can be about what they want to achieve, and about how Cabinetcollectively prioritises its goals, the more effectively departments and Crown entitieswill be able to respond. 261The ACTPS challenge is to match this clarity of direction with “clear communication of ideasto government, particularly where policy options involve difficult trade-offs”. 262Strategic and direction setting advice for the ACTPS then, is advice that is timely, forwardlooking, sensitive to the Government’s policies and aligned with its stated priorities, andmakes connections across government in pursuit of citizen-centred service delivery. Aboveall, it engages with problems and drives robust, evidenced based debate at the Cabinet table,and with the citizenry, about the best course of action for the ACT and people of Canberra.Strategic Priority Setting and Resource AllocationAt the time of the Strategic and Functional Review of the ACT Public Sector and Services,the predominant view was that the Budget was the central strategic policy setting mechanismof the Government, and it was through the annual Budget cycle that priorities were decidedand given effect. In light of recent developments in ACT Government practice – which itsupports – the Review has sought to redefine the way in which priorities are set and howresources are allocated.Rather than being the vehicle through which priorities are developed and articulated, theBudget should be framed in the light of government priorities and be focussed on populatingthe vacant middle ground with clearly articulated and robustly designed policy interventions.The Budget process while focused on allocation of scarce resources (inevitably involvingprioritisation of spending), cannot be a substitute for genuine whole of government prioritysetting conducted well in advance of the annual Budget cycle against the Government’slonger term strategic goals – not least because of its central focus on financial matters.The Review has deliberately emphasised the process of settling Government priorities as theprimary vehicle through which the vision articulated in the Canberra Plan is rendered into261 State Services Commission (2001) p.14.262 Advisory Group on Reform of Government Administration (2010) p.20.Strategy, Resource Allocation and the Vacant Middle Ground: 211