CHAIR —I welcome the officers of the Public Service and Merit Protection Commission and ask are there any general questions of the commission.

Senator ROBERT RAY —The public service commission, is it?

CHAIR —Yes.

Senator ROBERT RAY —I have just a general question. Have you looked at the Auditor-General's report that pointed to a shortage of appropriate skills being one of the main obstacles to agencies meeting their targets for electronic service delivery?

Ms Williams —We, of course, have kept up with the Auditor-General's report on this and a number of issues, and we are looking at general development of programs, probably more targeted to project delivery than particularly electronic service delivery. But certainly we are, on an ongoing basis, looking at development programs we can deliver to fill in skill gaps.

Senator ROBERT RAY —So it is just an ongoing thing for you to keep up with. Could I ask, with due deference to Senator Mackay, have you read the report in the Launceston Examiner today on page 8 that points out the fact that there has been a 28 per cent reduction in Commonwealth public servants in Tasmania from March 1996 through to the present time? Are those figures verifiable? Do they equate with what you know?

Mr Lamond —We have had the opportunity today to very quickly have a look at the statistics that were quoted in the newspaper report. It is our understanding that they are reasonably accurate in terms of comment on the decline in public service employment. Simply again looking at the data, it is our view that the percentage of permanent Australian Public Service employment in Tasmania, for example, has remained constant virtually over a decade in terms of its percentage of the overall employed labour force. For example, the percentage of permanent Australian Public Service staff whose pay centre location was Tasmania as at June 1990 was 2.2 per cent. As at June 1999 this had dropped slightly to 2.1 per cent. As a summary analysis, this means that as at June 1999 some 2,095 ongoing staff were identified as employed in Tasmania.

The caution I mention in terms of those figures is that that data has been drawn from our Australian Public Service employment database, which actually records employment by pay centre location. There is a difficulty there because as departments make different arrangements to pay people, there will be a pay location in Tasmania but in fact staff in other locations may be paid from that centralised pay function. We have no way at the moment of refining those figures but I understand as we go through the development exercise for our new employment database on the Australian Public Service we will be able to provide much firmer and more accurate figures about the actual location of individuals. So the short answer to your question is the figures that were quoted are accurate. In terms of representation in the labour market, over a period of almost a decade the percentage of Australian Public Service employment in Tasmania has remained stable as a percentage of the work force.

Senator ROBERT RAY —There was a report in the Canberra Times on 24 November that said the Australian Public Service was in fact losing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees faster than it was employing them. Can I ask what steps have been taken to close that gap between separation and new recruitment?

Ms Williams —You will understand, of course, Senator, that this is for agencies themselves to look at. What the commission does is point out the levels of all the disadvantaged groups in its diversity report. Of course through our networks we try to spread best practice and suggest ways that lack could be filled.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Yes, I understood you could not go out and recruit them yourselves, but you try to inspire them to -

Ms Williams —We try and spread best practice and encourage them to fill those gaps.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Is it your responsibility, Ms Williams, to negotiate packages with departing secretaries and deputy secretaries?

Ms Williams —Secretaries are not my responsibility at all. Packages for departing deputy secretaries are for the agencies themselves but the packages are cleared with the commission.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Could you tell me what the process is on a deputy secretary, team leader or something like that at that level?

Ms Williams —The agency would negotiate, firstly, whether they are going to provide a package and, secondly, the level of that package and the timing of the package. They would then come to the commissioner to clear the level of the package.

Senator ROBERT RAY —You would make an evaluation of whether you thought it was the norm, not outrageous, et cetera.

Ms Williams —That is right, Senator.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Are you independent in doing that or do you seek advice?

Ms Williams —I am independent in doing that.

Senator ROBERT RAY —So in the case of any separated deputy secretary since you have had the post, you have not had any discussions with say the Secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet as to the appropriate level of that separating person, if that person is not from the Department of PM&C?

Ms Williams —No, I have not. I have, however, had discussions with the secretary themselves because they put forward a case to me. I would discuss it with the secretary of the officer.

Senator ROBERT RAY —I understand. You would discuss it with the secretary or acting secretary of the agency concerned but you do not actually, within your office, discuss it with other secretaries, especially PM&C secretary unless it concerned him directly in terms of the department.

Ms Williams —That is correct, Senator.

Senator ROBERT RAY —You are assuring me that has never occurred?

Ms Williams —Well -

Senator ROBERT RAY —In your time.

Ms Williams —No, that has never occurred.

Senator FAULKNER —Just so we are clear on that, if I can just follow through Senator Ray's question, that would go to advice either sought or proffered from the Secretary of PM&C.

Ms Williams —Sorry, Senator, I did not -

Senator FAULKNER —There are two possible ways that advice might be forthcoming. It might be sought by yourself or it might be proffered by the Secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet. I just wanted to be assured again, so we can be absolutely clear for the record, that you have not sought the advice of the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. That is what I think you have said but I want to have that absolutely clear.

Ms Williams —Yes, that is correct.

Senator FAULKNER —I also want to be assured that such advice has not been proffered.

Ms Williams —No. Sorry, Mr Kennedy obviously acts when I am not around, so I just wanted to check.

Senator FAULKNER —I appreciate that. We can use `you' plural but the answer Ms Williams has given stands.

Ms Williams —Yes.

Senator FAULKNER —I did want to just ask, if I could, about this question of the Secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet's performance pay. I think we have at least briefly canvassed this process on a previous occasion or maybe even more than one previous occasion. Ms Williams, could you just encapsulate for the benefit of the committee how you see the role of the Public Service Commissioner in assessing the performance of the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Ms Williams —I understand, Senator, that Prime Minister and Cabinet has given you a piece of paper on this issue for secretaries and said that the same process would be followed for the head of Prime Minister and Cabinet. Therefore, the process as I understand it is that Mr Moore Wilton would do a self-assessment, as all secretaries do. This would then come to me as commissioner. I would therefore discuss that self-assessment with him and hopefully with the Prime Minister, although prime ministers are busy people. Advice would go to the Prime Minister, who would then make a decision.

Senator FAULKNER —Would you pro-actively seek the views of the Prime Minister in this instance? You would attempt to, I think you have said.

Ms Williams —Yes, the process with all secretaries is that after the self-assessment it is discussed with their minister and then comes to the head of Prime Minister and Cabinet and to me. That is then discussed with the responsible minister.

Senator FAULKNER —Yes but there is a unique process here with one secretary, obviously, because of that secretary's role in the assessment process in relation to other secretaries.

Ms Williams —Yes, it is.

Senator FAULKNER —This is a different process.

Ms Williams —You are right, Senator. As I said, prime ministers are busy people but I would hope to be able to talk to the Prime Minister about that.

Senator FAULKNER —I do want to be clear here. Obviously you have indicated you would seek to gain the views of the Prime Minister. I assume you would not seek any other views. Would that be right?

Ms Williams —I think the agreed process does not allow that, Senator.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Yes. I thought you were going to volunteer for it.

Senator FAULKNER —There is a self-assessment, then of course there is your own report. Would it be your intention in this circumstance to show your report to the secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet? Is that the way the process would work, or how you - in the interests of transparency - would see it working in this instance?

Ms Williams —I would expect to show that to the head of Prime Minister and Cabinet in the same way that reports are shown to other secretaries before they go forward to the Prime Minister.

Senator FAULKNER —For the benefit of the committee, Ms Williams, would you be able to tell us what sort of factors you will be taking into account in your assessment?

Ms Williams —I think also, Senator, the paper Prime Minister and Cabinet gave you said the particular performance criteria would be settled between the relevant secretary and their minister. Therefore obviously they would have to be taken into account and I have not yet seen those. I am not yet aware of those.

Senator ROBERT RAY —A very polite way of saying, `Buzz off.'

Senator FAULKNER —Has the Public Service and Merit Protection Commission offered any advice to government on the benefits in terms of transparency in government operations for performance criteria to be made public?

Ms Williams —I think I said at previous estimates, Senator, that Mr Moore Wilton and I have discussed the whole issue of the kinds of things that would be taken into account and the process that would be used. I think we have discussed the whole question of whether these should be public or not. I think that advice fed into government's decision. I think Ms Belcher mentioned to you this morning that they would not be made public.

Senator FAULKNER —Yes, I think she did drop quite a substantial hint to that effect, I must admit, even though the direct question I asked about that was not answered in the question on notice. Time is moving on so we can look at this another time again, thank you very much.

CHAIR —I thank the officers for your participation. I now call on the Australian National Audit Office.

[9.56 p.m.]