Government Response
to the
Review of the
Election Commitments Costing Act 2012
Presented by
Andrew Barr MLA
Treasurer
INTRODUCTION
The Government welcomes the findings of the Review of the Election Commitments
Costing Act 2012 and thanks the Australian New Zealand School of Government
(ANZSOG) Institute of Governance at the University of Canberra who undertook the
Review.
Overall the Review found that the Election Commitments Costing Act 2012 (the Act) and
supporting Guidelines were considered very successful during the 2012 ACT Election.
There was high level of satisfaction with the Act and processes, which was attributed in
part to sound project management of the costing process by Treasury and the
establishment of effective working relationships between Treasury and political parties.
Particularly important to the Government is the Review finding that the costing process
occurred in a transparent, non partisan and objective manner. It was found that the
integrity of the public service was maintained, and that political parties and public
servants clearly understood their roles and responsibilities. Also pleasing was the Review
finding that all political parties considered that they and other political parties had
complied with the intent and requirements of the Act.
In summary the Act and guidelines were found to be a significant advancement on past
practice and political parties considered that they should be retained for future ACT
elections.
The Review includes five possible improvements, related in the main to process issues.
They are not recommendations by the reviewers but in part reflect instead, suggestions
made to the reviewers during interviews.
In its response, the Government has:

agreed to 1 suggestion;

agreed in part to 1 suggestion;

agreed in principle to 1 suggestion;

noted 1 suggestion; and

not agreed to 1 suggestion.
The Government has provided a response to each of the suggestions of the Review.
Government Response to the Review of the Election Commitments Costing Act 2012
Page 2
RESPONSE TO SUGGESTIONS
SUGGESTION 1
Parties, if they considered it useful in their campaign strategy, could be allowed to
submit requests that they have not yet publicly announced provided that they specify a
date when the commitment will be publicly announced so that Treasury can publish
the costing on that day. The same requirements around withdrawing a request should
still apply as presently defined.
Government Response
Noted.
The Government has concerns that this suggestion could result in parties submitting a
large number of costing requests which are subsequently withdrawn due to campaigns
evolving and changing during an election period.
SUGGESTION 2
Treasury could maintain and publicly issue a running “tally” for each major party during
the election campaign.
Government Response
Not Agreed.
As the Review identified, any tally may not be complete. Commitment costings are
voluntary, therefore not all costings are necessarily submitted and the release of
progress totals only reflects the timing of submitted commitments for costing and not
the full fiscal impact of party commitments.
Not all commitment costings submitted are able to have their cost determined and
would therefore not be included in a tally. As a result a tally could be misleading as these
commitments may have significant cost.
Treasury’s role is that of an independent verifier of the costs. The publication of tallies
by Treasury would diminish Treasury’s perceived independence in the costing process.
The question of whether to present a tally to the public is a matter for the political
parties to decide. Conversely any interested person or the media could easily present a
tally from the publicly available released costings.
SUGGESTION 3
The confidentiality provisions of the Act could be broadened to include any aspect of
any dealings that Treasury has with the Parties in the course of undertaking election
costings, and so avoid concerns that the incumbent Government had access to
information that could be used against other contestants in the campaign.
Government Response to the Review of the Election Commitments Costing Act 2012
Page 3
Government Response
Agreed in principle
The Government will support this suggestion in principle at this time. The issue should
be further considered in the Government’s review of the Caretaker Conventions, as
occurs before every election period, which apply during the election costing period.
Once this review is complete, the Government will be better placed to consider this issue
from all perspectives and decide what action is required, to either the Caretaker
Conventions or the Act.
SUGGESTION 4
As part of the ongoing monitoring of the Act’s impact, Treasury (or another
commissioned body) could compile a data base of access to, and media reporting on
election costings material. This could include recording the numbers visiting the
information on the Treasury website.
Government Response
Agreed in part.
The Government accepts the part of this suggestion that is related to counting visitor
numbers to the commitments costing page on the Treasury website. Treasury
understands that the system changes required to include a count are minor.
The Government does not accept that part of this suggestion related to compiling a
database of media reports. It would not be practical to implement a process that was
guaranteed to be comprehensive, particularly given the expansion of media into
electronic fora.
SUGGESTION 5
As an act of good faith, the Guidelines on which the Act depends for effective
implementation could be tabled before the Assembly rises for the election to allow for
parliamentary scrutiny, and discussion if warranted, of its provisions.
Government Response
Agreed. This suggestion is accepted (when feasible) albeit via a modified process.
The Government considers that a more constructive method of engagement with the
parties, prior to the finalisation of the Guidelines, would be to consult on the draft
Guidelines outside of session. The final Guidelines (where feasible) could then be tabled
in the final sitting period.
The Guidelines reflect the practical operation of the Act. If any changes are made to the
Act, this may necessitate some redrafting of the Guidelines to reflect any required
procedural changes. If the Act is amended late in the final sitting period, there may not
be adequate time to table the revised Guidelines in the same period.
Government Response to the Review of the Election Commitments Costing Act 2012
Page 4