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

that their work was fully connected with the work of other Directorates and that ofstakeholders in pursuit of the Cabinet's strategic objectives”. 120The National School of Government notes that the Scottish Government’s clearly articulateddirection, and focus on performance, in combination with structural change, has drivenchanges to work culture and processes within the civil service. Members of the StrategicBoard, responsible for broader and cross cutting objectives, have needed to work together in adifferent way, explicitly engaging with “trade-offs between the objectives – such as economicgrowth and carbon emissions – and other issues of potential tension”:this is about fundamentally changing the culture of the civil service, and instilling a coresense of both confidence and purpose within it. Ministers and officials alike see their role atthe centre as steering Scotland into the future, not managing or running it. This has been aprocess that may not sit naturally with traditional ways of working and culture, with the scaleand rapidity of change causing both unease and confusion amongst an anxious minority.Paradoxically however, it is precisely this unnerving extent of liberation that is likely to driveforward this programme of change successfully. 121Of course, simply copying Scottish structures will not of itself improve the performance orservice delivery capacity of the ACTPS. It is acknowledged that within a singleorganisational structure, there remains scope for silos to develop and that genuinelycollaborative working remains hard. Nevertheless, the essence of the Scottish governanceframework and its civil service – “built ... around whole-of-government outcomes, with aNational Performance Framework as its centrepiece and a well-developed machinery fortracking progress” 122 has much to offer to the governance of a city state like Canberra.The Scottish approach nevertheless creates challenges for traditional notions of Ministerialaccountability:In such an outcome focused, cross-cutting approach to government, mapping the inputsagainst the outputs is not always clear, particularly at local authority level where a range ofcommunity partners are responsible together for achieving a shared outcome. Mapping thecausal relationship between actions and outcomes, and being able to establish which actionscontributed to which outcomes, are not easy tasks where several agencies are involved. 123There are similarities between the Scottish and ACT governance systems, beyond theircommon Westminster heritage. The Canberra Plan already articulates the goals of theGovernment against key themes, and outlines broad strategic indicators. Furthermore, theACT Government has recently established a website, akin to Scotland Performs, providingregularly updated high level indicators of progress called Measuring Our Progress. Thatwebsite “is aligned with the seven strategic themes of The Canberra Plan: Towards OurSecond Century – the ACT Government's plan to help create an even better place to live.120 National School of Government (2009a) pp.2-3.121 National School of Government (2009a) pp.14, 15.122 ‘t Hart, Paul (2010) “Lifting its game to get ahead: the Canberra bureaucracy’s reform by stealth” The Australian Review ofPublic Affairs http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2010/07/thart.html123 National School of Government (2009a) p11.Governing the City State: 78