It is now mid-way through the third term of ACT self-government. Kate Carnell came to power with a great deal of vigour and enthusiasm and some worthwhile reforms in mind. Some of that has worn off in the face of a range of set-backs, some expected and some unexpected; some beyond her control some within it. None the less, she and her government hope that having achieved some reforms, especially in public-sector management, more visible achievements should start to flow.
The set-backs have been a cultural hostility to public-sector reform; a lack of talent among her colleagues; minority government; and the profound affect of the Howard Government’s policies on Canberra. In Opposition it was easy for Mrs Carnell to say we would do this and that and the world will be sweet. In Government, it is not that simple. There are constraints created by other power centres: unions, the federal sphere, the legislature, Cabinet, the parliamentary party, the party at large and the media.
Mrs Carnell has achieved some pluses that eluded some earlier governments. She has worked a minority government well by not alienating the cross-benches to the extent that she is thrown from office while not compromising her agenda too greatly. She has avoided any hugely embarrassing scandals. She has not increased the total tax take. She is far ore accessible than her predecessors and has not fallen into the trap of adopting a siege mentality in the face of criticism. Some of that, no doubt, is due to her being a good media performer and having the personality to bounce back. However, as she and her government get further into their term, electors will be looking for some tangible evidence of dividends from the reforms … some gain from the pain. People will be watching things like hospital waiting lists, grants commission measures of efficiency to ensure we are getting value for money and fairness in dealing with public spending.
Her reform of the public sector, while initially giving rise to shock, now seems modest compared to that of her federal colleagues. There have been no compulsory redundancies.
On two issues her government has failed because it took too much notice of a coterie of small-businesspeople: the reregulation of shopping hours and the structure of planning. Fortunately, the former has a sunset clause, but the latter does not. The ACT needs a transparent planning system, along the Stein model; it will be cheaper in the long run and will better protect the environmental asset we need to attract a more sustainable private sector.
The massive cut-backs federally have shown the folly of past policies which were based on the false notion that a vibrant private sector could be created by allowing developers easy access to the public wealth tied up in the city’s land so they could build medium density housing. A waning federal public sector has wiped out the demand. Moreover, tourism, while valuable, can be only part of the solution.
The real test for the Carnell Government will be whether Canberra’s major assets … high education, clean air and water, good infrastructure, pleasant living and high social capital … can be preserved and made attractive to long-term hi-tech industry. Educated labour and a beautiful environment is going at a very internationally competitive rate in Canberra.
Parts of the private sector are beginning to see this and the concentration of effort is rightly on things like transport links, rather than construction. The next 18 months will be critical.