Howard dumps privacy proposal
Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:54:14 +1000
> From: Bernard Robertson-Dunn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Howard dumps privacy proposal
> Date: Sunday, 30 March 1997 1:47
> At 11:21 PM 28/03/97 +1000, "Ian Johnston" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>With budget constraints, governments are looking for better value-for-money
>>in service provision.
> Trying to do more for less is a reasonable goal, if done by increased
> efficiency. Paying less and getting less is questionable. Getting a lesser
> number of people to do the same thing may also be questionable if it leads
> to stress and mistakes.
> >A reduction in quality, cost or a combination of both may be objectives of
> Are you suggesting that a reduction in quality may be an objective?
If a desired outcome can be achieved by a service provider reducing the quality
of service and costs, then $ savings may be applied to the benefit of others.
Quality may be sarificed for quantity.
> >Outsourcers' contracts normally provide for performance monitoring,
> >measurement and service standards.
> You seem to place a lot of faith in contracts. There are many examples of
> the government coming off second best in contractural arangements
I don't place a _lot_ of faith in contracts. But I know that government goods
and services have been delivered under contract for many years. There is a risk
that government will come off second best on some projects, but on a portfolio
of projects there should be net savings to government (around 10% I
Canberra, Australia's National Capital