Post by Denis-NFA on Jan 14, 2014 8:27:08 GMT 7
A SUPER-DEPARTMENT employing one-quarter of the commonwealth bureaucracy and leading social policy from conception to service delivery would be created under plans being considered by the Coalition.
Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews has signalled the potential for "substantial" savings from a merger of the departments of Social Services and Human Services, warning bureaucrats that "change is inevitable" when he was asked whether the move would lead to redundancies.
Under the proposal, the Department of Social Services, which is the lead social policy agency in the commonwealth, could absorb the service delivery functions of the nation's biggest bureaucracy, the Department of Human Services, which handles Centrelink and pension payments.
In a wide-ranging interview with The Australian, Mr Andrews said any merger would lead to substantial savings in the longer term, but stressed this was only an idea at present.
"There is obviously an option to bring those two (departments) together," he said. "It depends on whether the commonwealth wants to have just one department which is service delivery or do you say, 'Look, frankly, you could save a huge amount, particularly in the back office, by having one system rather than two, one set of corporate people within the department rather than two'.
"There would obviously be, maybe not immediately but over the medium term ... savings by bringing the two together so that's clearly an option."
The proposals are being considered alongside the national commission of audit announced in October by Joe Hockey and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann to review the whole-of-government operations. "We can look at getting rid of waste, and we will obviously do that in the context of the next budget, and everybody in government is on that path," Mr Andrews said.
He said the government had no choice but to deal with change, and he acknowledged duplicated jobs would be lost if this option went ahead
"Change is inevitable, it's how you manage change," he said. "If you don't ... it's going to occur, anyway; it will sneak up on you and the consequences will be worse and the options for dealing with it less.
"There are things to be done and we have to do them - we weren't elected just to run along. The public service could quite adequately run Australia without any politicians. They do a reasonable job of it, we do have a good public service."
The departments have budgets worth almost $100 billion and Human Services employs about 35,000 people in its major role of service delivery, although it has far fewer resources.
Last year, its deputy secretary, Barbara Bennett, wrote to employees and warned them the agency had become too top-heavy. "(It is) clear there are more employees at the executive level than are needed for the efficient and effective operation of the department," she wrote.
The Coalition campaigned on cutting the commonwealth public service by about 12,000 positions but found, once in government, that the previous Labor administration had done some of the work for them.
"The government remains committed to streamlining the public service, but will review the timing and approach to implementing its commitment in view of the expected headcount reduction required by the former government's efficiency dividends and associated measures," it says.
"Further decisions on the public service headcount will be taken in light of the findings of the National Commission of Audit."
Commonwealth and Public Sector Union assistant secretary Louise Persse and other social policy groups said the idea of merging departments could have some merit. "There may be some organisational merit in looking at combining the policy and service delivery roles but this looks like another Coalition job-cutting exercise," Ms Persse said.
"Further, as anyone who has visited a Centrelink office or a call centre can tell you, there are not enough staff to meet customer demand, and that's the real problem.
"More than 4000 Department of Human Services positions have been lost in the past two years, and the Coalition will slash thousands more."
However, National Welfare Rights Network president Maree O'Halloran said there was often an "artificial divide" between formulating social policy and delivering it.
"Merging the departments of Human Services and Social Services is attractive from an efficiency point of view, but if budgetary considerations are the prime motive for merging then it is the wrong course of action," she told The Australian.
"This artificial divide between service delivery and policy can create unnecessary problems for those who need support and, in an ideal world, policy and service delivery should work together.
"Historically, social security policy and service delivery have operated under the one agency, and this can work well. People who rely on Centrelink services face major challenges, with people waiting six months or more for a review, more than two million overpayments a year, and long wait times in the office and on the telephone.
"It would be difficult to justify a merger if it could not address these problems and improve services for the community."
Opposition families and payments spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said the proposal was nothing but "savage cuts".
"Kevin Andrews should be telling people how he'll improve services for families and vulnerable people, not floating yet another thought bubble on how to make savage cuts," she said.
www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/super-agency-for-social-services-as-coalition-eyes-merger/story-fn9hlxnq-1226801058743#
Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews has signalled the potential for "substantial" savings from a merger of the departments of Social Services and Human Services, warning bureaucrats that "change is inevitable" when he was asked whether the move would lead to redundancies.
Under the proposal, the Department of Social Services, which is the lead social policy agency in the commonwealth, could absorb the service delivery functions of the nation's biggest bureaucracy, the Department of Human Services, which handles Centrelink and pension payments.
In a wide-ranging interview with The Australian, Mr Andrews said any merger would lead to substantial savings in the longer term, but stressed this was only an idea at present.
"There is obviously an option to bring those two (departments) together," he said. "It depends on whether the commonwealth wants to have just one department which is service delivery or do you say, 'Look, frankly, you could save a huge amount, particularly in the back office, by having one system rather than two, one set of corporate people within the department rather than two'.
"There would obviously be, maybe not immediately but over the medium term ... savings by bringing the two together so that's clearly an option."
The proposals are being considered alongside the national commission of audit announced in October by Joe Hockey and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann to review the whole-of-government operations. "We can look at getting rid of waste, and we will obviously do that in the context of the next budget, and everybody in government is on that path," Mr Andrews said.
He said the government had no choice but to deal with change, and he acknowledged duplicated jobs would be lost if this option went ahead
"Change is inevitable, it's how you manage change," he said. "If you don't ... it's going to occur, anyway; it will sneak up on you and the consequences will be worse and the options for dealing with it less.
"There are things to be done and we have to do them - we weren't elected just to run along. The public service could quite adequately run Australia without any politicians. They do a reasonable job of it, we do have a good public service."
The departments have budgets worth almost $100 billion and Human Services employs about 35,000 people in its major role of service delivery, although it has far fewer resources.
Last year, its deputy secretary, Barbara Bennett, wrote to employees and warned them the agency had become too top-heavy. "(It is) clear there are more employees at the executive level than are needed for the efficient and effective operation of the department," she wrote.
The Coalition campaigned on cutting the commonwealth public service by about 12,000 positions but found, once in government, that the previous Labor administration had done some of the work for them.
"The government remains committed to streamlining the public service, but will review the timing and approach to implementing its commitment in view of the expected headcount reduction required by the former government's efficiency dividends and associated measures," it says.
"Further decisions on the public service headcount will be taken in light of the findings of the National Commission of Audit."
Commonwealth and Public Sector Union assistant secretary Louise Persse and other social policy groups said the idea of merging departments could have some merit. "There may be some organisational merit in looking at combining the policy and service delivery roles but this looks like another Coalition job-cutting exercise," Ms Persse said.
"Further, as anyone who has visited a Centrelink office or a call centre can tell you, there are not enough staff to meet customer demand, and that's the real problem.
"More than 4000 Department of Human Services positions have been lost in the past two years, and the Coalition will slash thousands more."
However, National Welfare Rights Network president Maree O'Halloran said there was often an "artificial divide" between formulating social policy and delivering it.
"Merging the departments of Human Services and Social Services is attractive from an efficiency point of view, but if budgetary considerations are the prime motive for merging then it is the wrong course of action," she told The Australian.
"This artificial divide between service delivery and policy can create unnecessary problems for those who need support and, in an ideal world, policy and service delivery should work together.
"Historically, social security policy and service delivery have operated under the one agency, and this can work well. People who rely on Centrelink services face major challenges, with people waiting six months or more for a review, more than two million overpayments a year, and long wait times in the office and on the telephone.
"It would be difficult to justify a merger if it could not address these problems and improve services for the community."
Opposition families and payments spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said the proposal was nothing but "savage cuts".
"Kevin Andrews should be telling people how he'll improve services for families and vulnerable people, not floating yet another thought bubble on how to make savage cuts," she said.
www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/super-agency-for-social-services-as-coalition-eyes-merger/story-fn9hlxnq-1226801058743#