Comments on Robert Gottliebsen “Time for a Canberra shake-up”, 23/03/2010, http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Kevin-Rudd-Tony-Abbott-JSF-pd20100323-3SS56?OpenDocument&src=rab
Absolutely right!
There is a need for the APS to be accountable to its outcomes and responsibilities be taken when necessary.
Bureaucrats cannot simply hide behind the scene and escape their responsibilities.
The design and implementation of a number of big policy items in the stimulus programs should be accounted for, so future APS advice and services can learn from them.
The cash handouts (to necessarily increase deficits, debt and future taxpayers liabilities), the NBN, the pink batts, the BER, you name it.
Some people must take responsibilities for them.
Who are they?
Showing posts with label bureaucrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bureaucrats. Show all posts
2009-10-12
Treasury partisan and incompetent
Comments on Glenn Milne “Mandarin's partiality”, 12/10/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26195542-7583,00.html
Some of the Treasury recent views are suspicious, to say the least. They either indicate they are incompetent, or very biased.
The budget economic forecast for out years as a sustained above trend growth following this severe great global recession, is a prime example.
Another example is the argument about the so called structural budget deficit that had been caused by the previous government. It was completely ludicrous. To argue that the previous government caused it a few years earlier when there was no sign of economic trouble and did not say anything about the Rudd government's first budget spending and still implementing the tax cuts in its second budget is so blindly partisan.
The third one is about the asymmetry in the advice by treasury about the economic stimulus: before it introduction it was “go early, go hard and go households”; but when every sign had already indicated that Australia had not had a recession and the economy was doing well, then they say withdrawal the stimulus will cause 100000 jobs.
There is no question that the top economic bureaucrat has become partisan and that Treasury has lost its economic competency.
Some of the Treasury recent views are suspicious, to say the least. They either indicate they are incompetent, or very biased.
The budget economic forecast for out years as a sustained above trend growth following this severe great global recession, is a prime example.
Another example is the argument about the so called structural budget deficit that had been caused by the previous government. It was completely ludicrous. To argue that the previous government caused it a few years earlier when there was no sign of economic trouble and did not say anything about the Rudd government's first budget spending and still implementing the tax cuts in its second budget is so blindly partisan.
The third one is about the asymmetry in the advice by treasury about the economic stimulus: before it introduction it was “go early, go hard and go households”; but when every sign had already indicated that Australia had not had a recession and the economy was doing well, then they say withdrawal the stimulus will cause 100000 jobs.
There is no question that the top economic bureaucrat has become partisan and that Treasury has lost its economic competency.
2009-09-07
Government and bureaucrats are abusing economics
Comments on David Burchell “An economist's laugh, but joke's on us”, 7/09/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26035133-5013479,00.html
The Keynesian’s main approach to macroeconomic policy is to use government expenditures as the main tool to manage the aggregate demand. Since that comes from government, how successful of that demand management depends on the competency and virtue of the government of the day, as well as top economic bureaucrats.
Unfortunately the experience over the past year or so in Australia shows both were not competent enough and the government was too focused on its own election politics as opposed to the nation’s well beings.
The Treasury, the nation’s top economic advisory agency for example, came up with cash handouts that were the dumbest economic strategy to stimulate the demand. Why didn’t it come up with better targeted demand stimulating measures? One can only guess.
The government, on the other hand, came up with the Education Revolution spending to build a school hall or library in each and every school irrespective whether they needed it or not and irrespective school funding needs at all. That has generated huge wastes and inefficiency and now they have a budget overrun and have to increase funding to that program.
The Indigenous Housing projects in the Northern Territory by the federal government is another prime example of how incompetent of both the government and its bureaucratic agencies. So much money and time have been spent and no single house has been built. How competent was that?
While on the other hand, the government is using the crisis as an excuse to increase spending in the name of jobs. Its own doing has been no different in giving some unemployed people and ask them to fill an ABS job survey to say they are employed.
That is not what Keynes had in mind and not true Keynesians are about. That is a gross abuse of economics, economic principles and proper economic and budgetary governance.
The Keynesian’s main approach to macroeconomic policy is to use government expenditures as the main tool to manage the aggregate demand. Since that comes from government, how successful of that demand management depends on the competency and virtue of the government of the day, as well as top economic bureaucrats.
Unfortunately the experience over the past year or so in Australia shows both were not competent enough and the government was too focused on its own election politics as opposed to the nation’s well beings.
The Treasury, the nation’s top economic advisory agency for example, came up with cash handouts that were the dumbest economic strategy to stimulate the demand. Why didn’t it come up with better targeted demand stimulating measures? One can only guess.
The government, on the other hand, came up with the Education Revolution spending to build a school hall or library in each and every school irrespective whether they needed it or not and irrespective school funding needs at all. That has generated huge wastes and inefficiency and now they have a budget overrun and have to increase funding to that program.
The Indigenous Housing projects in the Northern Territory by the federal government is another prime example of how incompetent of both the government and its bureaucratic agencies. So much money and time have been spent and no single house has been built. How competent was that?
While on the other hand, the government is using the crisis as an excuse to increase spending in the name of jobs. Its own doing has been no different in giving some unemployed people and ask them to fill an ABS job survey to say they are employed.
That is not what Keynes had in mind and not true Keynesians are about. That is a gross abuse of economics, economic principles and proper economic and budgetary governance.
2009-09-04
Good or poor bureaucrats?
Comments on Robert Gottliebsen “Swan's stimulus log-jam”, 4/09/2009, http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Housing-project-not-all-over-yet-pd20090904-VJTMA?OpenDocument&src=sph
It is interesting but ironic that the inefficiency and incompetence of bureaucrats has resulted in costs blow out and slowness in the implementation of the Rudd government’s stimulus programs that now effectively has an effect in reducing the stimulus as the economy powers on beyond and above expectations.
Rather than being sacked, perhaps those involved in such inefficiency and incompetence might be promoted for their positive contribution now. Unexpected things can and do happen!
It is interesting but ironic that the inefficiency and incompetence of bureaucrats has resulted in costs blow out and slowness in the implementation of the Rudd government’s stimulus programs that now effectively has an effect in reducing the stimulus as the economy powers on beyond and above expectations.
Rather than being sacked, perhaps those involved in such inefficiency and incompetence might be promoted for their positive contribution now. Unexpected things can and do happen!
2009-08-24
Another case of lack of accountability by government and bureaucrats
Comments on report of “Overseas-trained doctors warned: 'Don't come here'” by DANIELLE CRONIN, The Canberra Times, 24/08/2009, http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/overseastrained-doctors-warned-dont-come-here/1603704.aspx
This case shows how inefficient government and bureaucrats are and how that inefficiency is affecting the lives and well beings of many Australians. It is totally unacceptable and must be changed. But the sad fact is that it is by no means an isolated incident. On the contrary, similar things can occur very frequently at both the federal and state government levels. One, for example, cannot forget the much talked and delayed project of over $600 million for Indigenous housing. So long time has passed and there is no single house built.
Government and bureaucrats must improve their efficiency of services and make policy more effective. On the one hand, there is a significant shortage of medical doctors and a long waiting list of patients. Yet on the other hand, we have seen cases like this that it took 28 days for the bureaucrats to work out a medical provision number for a newly arrived overseas doctor to work in Australia.
Both the government and bureaucrats should and must be accountable to the public and the taxpayers. The heads of those politicians who are responsible, but more likely of the relevant responsible bureaucrats should roll. Otherwise the lack of responsibility and accountability means inefficiency and more inefficiency, red tapes and more red tapes.
This case shows how inefficient government and bureaucrats are and how that inefficiency is affecting the lives and well beings of many Australians. It is totally unacceptable and must be changed. But the sad fact is that it is by no means an isolated incident. On the contrary, similar things can occur very frequently at both the federal and state government levels. One, for example, cannot forget the much talked and delayed project of over $600 million for Indigenous housing. So long time has passed and there is no single house built.
Government and bureaucrats must improve their efficiency of services and make policy more effective. On the one hand, there is a significant shortage of medical doctors and a long waiting list of patients. Yet on the other hand, we have seen cases like this that it took 28 days for the bureaucrats to work out a medical provision number for a newly arrived overseas doctor to work in Australia.
Both the government and bureaucrats should and must be accountable to the public and the taxpayers. The heads of those politicians who are responsible, but more likely of the relevant responsible bureaucrats should roll. Otherwise the lack of responsibility and accountability means inefficiency and more inefficiency, red tapes and more red tapes.
2009-06-17
Political debates, spins and government policies
Comments on Lenore Taylor “Former treasurer nails debate”, 17/06/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25648362-5017906,00.html
While it is understandable that there will always be political spins and every political side will try to twist and make arguments in their favour, politicians, especially the government should be sober behind the scene and formulate strategies and make public policies according to the reality and sound reasons, rather than apparent political spins.
In that light, the Rudd government should probably need to acknowledge that it inherited an economy in excellent shape and a fiscal position that few other countries could match at that time. That, in conjunction with Australia’s sound banking system and banking regulations/supervisions, was the solid basis for Australia to weather the current global economic crisis.
What the Rudd government should and must do is to stimulate the economy in the most effective and efficient ways and at the same time to keep government deficits and debts as low as possible. While those are past already, the government should realise that both the cash handouts and the schools stimulus have generated some undesirable effects. They were not done in the most effective and efficient ways. There have been wastes in them, or soem unnecessary government spendings at least. The government could have achieved the same stimulus and education investment effects while using less government / taxpayers’ money.
There are lessons from those, but it is not too late for the government to become more effective and more economically responsible. We have a long way ahead before the global economic crisis is over. Besides every government policy or spending can be a test of economic management.
For example, while the government’s new national broadband network proposal is well intended and has the potential to boost productivity and the efficiency of the economy as well as the welfare of the nation, how the project will be designed and handled by the government and the industry will have a long lasting effect on national welfare.
I think the government should approach the NBN with an open mind and conduct extensive consultations. It should use several independent business and economic cost benefit analyses (not every one of them needs to be very complex) to ensure that the most effective and efficient and economic option or options are adopted and implemented. It is a huge exercise and must be done very carefully. There is a lot of money involved and either the wastes or savings would be huge.
The government should not be captured by particular special interest groups, including Telstra and others in the industry as well. It also needs to resist the urge to revenge Telstra for its confrontation with the government. Particularly, it should ignore the ACCC’s view on competition regarding Telstra's monopoly. The ACCC’s behaviour is of revenging nature and also reflects its failure in successfully managing a monopoly in its regulatory approach. It has outdated views and strategies in regulating industries and firms. The ACCC needs reforms and catching-up with the trends in globalisation and economic integration.
The government, Telstra and other players should work together, recognising each other’s interest. So the government needs to stand above the position as a simple player or competitor. It needs to remove emotions from managing the process. It needs to analyse what is the best way to move forward for the nation as a whole. Further, everyone should avoid falling into the trap of the argument that if the technologies are the best, they must be good economically. You have to take account of cost and benefit and also consider demand and supply.
Treasury and the Communications department need to be effective in their advices and policy formulations. They need to learn from the lessons in the stimulus packages, in the NBN bidder process and its failure and in the new NBN proposals. Bureaucrats must resist the urge to revenge and need to work in the nation’s interest and not driven by personal emotions.
While it is understandable that there will always be political spins and every political side will try to twist and make arguments in their favour, politicians, especially the government should be sober behind the scene and formulate strategies and make public policies according to the reality and sound reasons, rather than apparent political spins.
In that light, the Rudd government should probably need to acknowledge that it inherited an economy in excellent shape and a fiscal position that few other countries could match at that time. That, in conjunction with Australia’s sound banking system and banking regulations/supervisions, was the solid basis for Australia to weather the current global economic crisis.
What the Rudd government should and must do is to stimulate the economy in the most effective and efficient ways and at the same time to keep government deficits and debts as low as possible. While those are past already, the government should realise that both the cash handouts and the schools stimulus have generated some undesirable effects. They were not done in the most effective and efficient ways. There have been wastes in them, or soem unnecessary government spendings at least. The government could have achieved the same stimulus and education investment effects while using less government / taxpayers’ money.
There are lessons from those, but it is not too late for the government to become more effective and more economically responsible. We have a long way ahead before the global economic crisis is over. Besides every government policy or spending can be a test of economic management.
For example, while the government’s new national broadband network proposal is well intended and has the potential to boost productivity and the efficiency of the economy as well as the welfare of the nation, how the project will be designed and handled by the government and the industry will have a long lasting effect on national welfare.
I think the government should approach the NBN with an open mind and conduct extensive consultations. It should use several independent business and economic cost benefit analyses (not every one of them needs to be very complex) to ensure that the most effective and efficient and economic option or options are adopted and implemented. It is a huge exercise and must be done very carefully. There is a lot of money involved and either the wastes or savings would be huge.
The government should not be captured by particular special interest groups, including Telstra and others in the industry as well. It also needs to resist the urge to revenge Telstra for its confrontation with the government. Particularly, it should ignore the ACCC’s view on competition regarding Telstra's monopoly. The ACCC’s behaviour is of revenging nature and also reflects its failure in successfully managing a monopoly in its regulatory approach. It has outdated views and strategies in regulating industries and firms. The ACCC needs reforms and catching-up with the trends in globalisation and economic integration.
The government, Telstra and other players should work together, recognising each other’s interest. So the government needs to stand above the position as a simple player or competitor. It needs to remove emotions from managing the process. It needs to analyse what is the best way to move forward for the nation as a whole. Further, everyone should avoid falling into the trap of the argument that if the technologies are the best, they must be good economically. You have to take account of cost and benefit and also consider demand and supply.
Treasury and the Communications department need to be effective in their advices and policy formulations. They need to learn from the lessons in the stimulus packages, in the NBN bidder process and its failure and in the new NBN proposals. Bureaucrats must resist the urge to revenge and need to work in the nation’s interest and not driven by personal emotions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
