State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill

It is a pleasure to take a call on Part 2 of the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill. Should any notes become apparent in front of me in the near future, that would be excellent. I know that members have made a considerable contribution to this debate and that Labour members have come to be able to support this bill, thanks to some robust discussion at the Finance and Expenditure Committee.

Of particular interest in Part 2 is the fact that there are adjustments being made to the Public Finance Act that allow for a more multi-sectoral, cross-departmental approach to a range of issues. I certainly welcome that. I think of issues such as mental health, which, obviously, sits firmly in the health budget—and it is good to see the Minister of Health in the Chamber today. I personally would like to see mental health as more of a priority in the health system, but there is no doubt that factors that contribute to good mental health sit in the education sector, they sit in the employment sector—they sit across a range of different departments. The idea that these amendments to the Public Finance Act would allow for, perhaps, a single budget that draws together a package involving a range of different departments and agencies with a single focus and a single line of reporting—with a focus on something like reducing the incidence of mental illness or better managing the incidence of mental illness or supporting people with mental illness into work and using that range of departments in that way—is, I think, an excellent step forward.

It is actually fantastic that the aspects of the bill that the Labour Party was not able to support at the first reading have been tidied up, because I think this is something that many, many people working in the Government sector and many people working in non-government organisations that deal with the Government sector will be very, very pleased to see. I think every member of this House will have heard people say that they want to see the breaking-down of the silos between Government agencies, and this would certainly support that happening. The fact that the information in the estimates and supporting information would be more closely aligned with that cross-sectoral approach would, I think, be welcomed by members as well, because there are often times when we really want to drill down to an issue and look at all the different factors relating to that issue and to be able to see in a simple document and in simple terms how the different agencies and departments of the Government are working together to alleviate that issue.

That just simply has not been clear in the past. Often, something like mental health might be discussed at the Health Committee, it might also be discussed at the Education and Science Committee, and it might also be discussed at the Social Services Committee. Members would not have a full understanding of what was happening across those different agencies. So the idea that that type of reporting would be able to occur is an important step forward and well supported by this side of the Committee. Standardising the governance and performance reporting requirements for companies currently listed in schedule 4 of the Public Finance Act and proposed to be moved to a new schedule 4A to make the framework more consistent with the provisions that apply to Crown entities companies covered by the Crown Entities Act is also, I think, a sensible move. Standardising practices across agencies is very helpful. I listened to the Hon Trevor Mallard last night talking about his frustration—

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: It was a very good speech.

It was a very good speech. He talked about his frustration as a Minister at discovering that people employed in different agencies were essentially doing the same job and not talking to each other and not reporting back to Cabinet in a way that made it clear that that kind of redundancy was occurring within the Government sector. So with those few comments, I would certainly like to add my weight to this piece of legislation.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 262 in the name of the Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman to Part 2 be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.