treasury annual report 1999-2000 · treasury department anual report 1999-2000. the hon r.f. court,...

1999-2000Annual Report

TREASURY D E P A R T M E N T

TR

EA

SU

RY D

EPA

RT

ME

NT

AN

UA

L R

EP

OR

T 1999-2000

The Hon R.F. Court, B Comm., MLA

TREASURER OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

1999-2000 Annual Report

I have pleasure in presenting the Treasury

Department’s Annual Report for the year ended

30 June 2000 for your information and presentation

to Parliament.

We have prepared this report in accordance with the

requirements of sections 62 and 64 of the Financial

Administration and Audit Act, section 31 of the

Public Sector Management Act and other relevant

written laws.

J L Langoulant

UNDER TREASURER

C o n t e n t s

Overview

Under Treasurer’s Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Operational Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Special Feature – Treasury Management Review . . . . . . .8

Treasury at a Glance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Our People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Customer Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Report on Operations

Economic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Resourcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Performance Assessment

Opinion of the Auditor General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

Certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

Performance Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Financial Summary

Treasury Financial Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50

Treasury Administered Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51

Financial Statements

Opinion of the Auditor General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54

Certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55

Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56

Notes to the Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63

Trust Funds - Statements of

Receipts and Payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79

Appendices

A Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104

B New Trust Fund Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106

C Project Evaluations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109

D Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110

E Ministerial Circulars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111

F Freedom of Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112

G Government Purchasing Charter . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113

H Office Directory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114

Overview

1T R E A S U R Y D E P A R T M E N T

U n d e r T r e a s u r e r ’ s R e v i e w

Treasury achieved considerable success over the past

12 months. We secured a fiscal outcome for the State

consistent with budget targets, developed and implemented

both new policy settings and new financial management

systems, and embarked on enhanced internal management

arrangements.

The contribution of Treasury staff, in particular in embracing

the new management arrangements has been a key factor

behind these achievements. Each issue has involved its own

complexities and challenges, and the positive manner in which

they have been approached by staff has ensured that success

has been achieved.

I will return to these areas in more detail shortly, however it

is appropriate to briefly review the economic and financial

circumstances which have needed to be managed over the

past 12 months.


0637-treas-ar4(finalattempt)-2 9/11/00 7:38 AM Page 1

Economic

Economic activity in Western Australia lifted

in 1999-2000, with growth in Gross State

Product over the year likely to exceed

the budget time forecast of 4 per cent.

This compares with average annual growth

of 4.9 per cent over the past five years.

Exports grew by a solid 16.8 per cent over

1999-2000, after falling by 4.3 per cent in

1998-99. Western Australia’s trade surplus

also rose strongly over 1999-2000, with

growth of 24.7 per cent recorded over the

year. However, business investment remained

slow, although it appears that the recent

decline in investment (from record levels in

1997-98) has bottomed out.

The strong base to the economy underpinned

a pick-up in consumption activity which grew

by 3.5 per cent in 1999-2000 and dwelling

investment which grew by a strong 12.7 per

cent. A significant bringing forward of new

construction to precede the introduction of

the Goods and Services Tax contributed to

this healthy position, and similar effects were

felt in retail sales, although new motor

vehicle sales suffered an opposite impact.

Commodity prices improved significantly

over the course of the year with notable

strengthening occurring in the alumina,

petroleum, nickel, liquefied natural gas and

gold sectors. The improved outlook in these

prices was timely as the mining sector

experienced some difficulties early in the

year. This was particularly evident in the gold

sector, where there was major rationalisation

to reduce production costs in response to the

lower price outlook.

Despite the weaker mining sector, the labour

market remained stable through the year,

with unemployment continuing to edge lower

to 5.9 per cent by 30 June 2000, even though

the participation rate remained high.

Overall, continued strong growth in exports

and a pick-up in business investment are

expected to underpin a steady improvement

in output growth and markets over coming

years.

Finances

The State’s financial position was stronger

at year’s end than had been forecast in the

1999-2000 Budget. This reflected higher than

anticipated revenue, partly offset by higher

expenses.

The strengthening in commodity prices

boosted revenues from minerals, while the

bring-forward effect of the Goods and

Services Tax on housing construction boosted

conveyance duty collections. These more than

offset an unexpected shortfall from Payroll

Tax resulting from employment growth being

concentrated in small firms, many of which

were under the Payroll Tax exemption

threshold.

The strengthening in the State’s financial

position is welcomed and contributes to the

management of debt growth, which remains a

priority. Debt has increased in recent years

due to high capital infrastructure works in the


T R E A S U R Y D E P A R T M E N T

Overview

2


transport, water and energy sectors. While

the debt burden is substantially lower than

recent historically high levels, constant

vigilance is necessary to protect against debt

growth. Higher interest costs reduce the

State’s capacity to provide essential services

in accordance with government policies.

Policy Issues

There were, as usual, a wide range of policy

initiatives in which Treasury was involved in

1999-2000. The most significant of these was

the development and implementation of the

Goods and Services Tax. This work had

several dimensions including policy issues

concerning the formulation and operation of

the Tax, the preparation and passage of

legislation facilitating the new arrangements,

determining the coverage of the Tax across

State agencies particularly as to its impact on

agency charges, preparing State agencies to

be Goods and Services Tax payers and

changing Commonwealth-State financial

arrangements as a consequence of the Tax

changes.

The introduction of new financial and

information technology systems to

accommodate the Goods and Services Tax

was, in many respects, a larger task than the

preparation for the Year 2000 issue. The

complexity of the task was heightened by the

limited time which was available to prepare

for the Goods and Services Tax. While it is

early times, these preparations appear to have

been successful in seeing a smooth

introduction of the new arrangements.

In other policy areas, significant issues dealt

with over the past 12 months were:

• the continued development of the accrual

output management basis to the State’s

budget arrangements. This initiative

commenced in 1996-97 and is now firmly

in its consolidation phase. Nevertheless,

further policy aspects associated with its

implementation require development.

While improvements are continuing to be

made, the accrual information on agency

outputs contained in the budget papers,

and in agency documents, contributes to a

better understanding of the efficiency and

effectiveness of delivery of government

services;

• presentation of the aggregate State budget

in an accrual government finance statistics

format for the first time. Positive comment

was received from users of the budget

papers about the clarity of the new

presentation;

• competition policy continued to contribute

to a more competitive economy. There are

a number of dimensions to this policy

which involved us working closely with

other agencies, such as legislation reviews

to avoid anti-competitive provisions,

competitive neutrality arrangements,

structural reviews and national reforms in

the water, gas and transport sectors. We

also liaised with the National Competition

Council to ensure that the State’s

competition policy payments from the

Commonwealth are secured each year;



• the sales of AlintaGas and Westrail Freight

business, which have seen considerable

Treasury involvement, have required the

resolution of complex policy and

regulatory issues specific to the two

industry sectors and have significant

financial consequences for the State. Both

sale processes moved towards their final

phases during the year as the passage of

legislation allowed both to be taken to the

market. The sales will increase the

competitiveness of the State’s economy

and the proceeds will strengthen State

finances;

• the successful completion of the transfer

of over 560 State agency bank accounts to

the Commonwealth Bank to deliver

significant savings on banking charges

and provide a wider range of services. The

selection of the Commonwealth Bank as

the preferred tenderer for provision of

merchant services was also progressed.

This will further reduce costs and provide

greater flexibility for the public dealing

with State agencies; and

• the Commonwealth Grants Commission

process continuing to have an important

impact on State finances. While recent

Commission assessments have not been

favourable, largely reflecting the State’s

strong economic growth, Treasury is

continuing to work to improve the State’s

share of the Goods and Services Tax

revenues into the future. We are also

involved in reviews of indigenous funding

and local government grant shares now

underway by the Grants Commission.

Financial Systems

Accountability is enhanced by the clarity of

information that is provided to the

community. This is particularly the case in

the world of public finance as overly

complex, and irregular financial reporting can

frustrate the accountability process. Treasury

has been working over recent years to

improve the quality of financial information

which it includes in various publications –

such as the budget papers – to ensure there is

as clear an understanding as possible of the

State’s financial position and trends.

The 2000-01 Budget, which was brought

down in May 2000, made significant progress

in this endeavour. The clarity of reporting

contributed to understanding both the State’s

aggregate financial position and outlook, as

well as agency outcomes and outputs. The

former, in particular, was widely recognised

as being improved in these papers.

We have embarked on a program to upgrade

the collection and management of financial

information across the public sector. This

program will be implemented in the first half

of 2000-01 and be available for the 2001-02

Budget. It will simplify the information

collection process, make it more timely and

reliable, and free staff time to concentrate on

analysis of the information which will benefit

the policy advising role, both in Treasury and

across agencies.



Overview

4


The Government Financial Responsibility Act

has also recently been passed by the

Parliament. This Act provides for regular and

specific reporting requirements, both in the

budget and through the course of the year.

These requirements will, over time, provide

enhanced accountability in regard to the

management of State finances.

Management

We have embarked on a complete review of

our management processes with the aim of

improving the clarity of our roles and

responsibilities and to ensure the Department

is well focused on working with our many

customers. A number of factors gave rise to

this review, including staff concerns that too

great an emphasis on technical issues was

concentrated in senior management levels

and, as a result, management issues did not

receive enough attention. The allocation of

responsibilities within the Department was

also considered to be sub-optimal, which had

implications for our organisational structure.

Following a comprehensive review of our

arrangements and practices, a Treasury

Management Review program was

commenced late in the year. The main

features of the review are outlined later in

this report, including the structural changes

that have been associated with the review.

The successful implementation of the review

will be a major priority in 2000-01 as it will

provide the basis for us to respond most

effectively to the Government’s requirements.

Finally, I would like to again express my

gratitude to Treasury staff for their individual

and collective contributions to the

Department throughout the year.



Overview



Activities

Key Achievements

Future Directions

O p e r a t i o n a l S u m m a r y

Economic

• Provides advice and analysis on State revenues, the economy, competition policy,intergovernmental financial relations and government trading enterprises.

• Facilitated legislation to implement tax reform and provided support to newintergovernmental processes associated with this reform.

• Provided quality analysis of economic and revenue trends to government andcontributed to the maintenance of the State’s AAA credit rating.

• Published a paper on the identification, costing and funding of communityservice obligations.

• Contributed to 46 legislation reviews under National Competition Policy whichassisted the State to secure the full competition policy payment of $45.6 million.

• Coordinated preparation of new guidelines for improving the efficiency andeffectiveness of Commonwealth specific purpose payments to the States.

• Developed a draft Memorandum of Understanding between the State and localgovernments to enhance cooperation and coordination between these sectors.

• Prepare a third tranche report on progress with the implementation of NationalCompetition Policy to the National Competition Council.

• Monitor the new tax reform arrangements from a State financial perspective andin terms of its impact on Western Australia.

• Push for reforms in Commonwealth specific purpose payments through theremoval of unnecessary ‘strings’ on funding.

• Contribute to the Commonwealth Grants Commission’s reviews into indigenousfunding, methods for distributing general purpose grants between localgovernments and methods for allocating Goods and Services Tax revenuesbetween the States.

6



Finance

• Advises on accounting policy and frameworksfor government operations. Participates inrationalising major assets. Provides corporateand information systems, including strategicand internal audit services.

• Assisted agencies prepare for theintroduction of the Goods and Services Tax.

• Completed a round of agency visits to helpthem with management reporting bestpractice and promote the use of accrualaccounting concepts.

• Successfully completed the transfer of theState’s banking business to theCommonwealth Bank resulting in significantsavings on banking charges and a wider rangeof services than was available under theprevious arrangement.

• Made a significant contribution to thesteering committees and working groups setup to oversee the sale of AlintaGas and theWestrail Freight business.

• Undertook a major review of our role andoperations. The Treasury ManagementReview will see benefits to Treasury, ouremployees and our customers.

• Undertook a comprehensive review of ourplanning processes that will provide us with aclearer focus for our operations.

• Review the Financial Administration and AuditAct, Regulations and Treasurer’s Instructionsto reflect recent reforms in financialmanagement.

• Finalise the sale of AlintaGas and the WestrailFreight business.

• Implement the recommendations from theTreasury Management Review.

Resourcing

• Advises on and manages the allocation of taxpayers’ resources to achievegovernment outcomes. Provides fiscal policy advice and financial monitoring andreporting services. Provides government property related policy, advice andinformation.

• Produced the 2000-01 State Budget. The Budget was presented on time andreceived positive comment form users, particularly in relation to the clarity of the information which, for the first time, was presented in a simplified (accrual government finance statistics) format.

• Developed the Government Financial Responsibility Act to establish a framework forgovernment financial planning and reporting that facilitates public scrutiny offinancial policy and performance.

• Prepared legislative amendments to facilitate the introduction of accrualappropriations, a capital user charge and e-commerce.

• Commenced quarterly acquittal of agencies outputs.

• Developed a Purchasing and Analysing Outputs Manual to assist agencies implementOutput Based Management.

• Developed Project Evaluation Guidelines to help agencies to apply a consistent andrigorous approach to major investment decisions. Provided advice on severalproposed major investments.

• Implemented new systems and procedures to ensure Goods and Services Taxcompliance for the government’s office accommodation portfolio.

• Implement a new information management system to improve agency dataexchange and to better manage budget estimates and production of government-wide financial information.

• Complete successful implementation of Output Based Management includingaccrual monthly and quarterly reporting.

• Subject to the necessary legislation being passed, implement accrualappropriations and a capital user charge for the 2001-02 State Budget.

• Continue to assist agencies in the implementation of financial managementreforms.

• Undertake a review of the issues that determine the extent to which governmentshould lease, own or otherwise procure its commercial property requirements.


During the first half of 2000 we undertook a

major review of our management practices

and organisational arrangements.

The review was assisted by a Melbourne-

based consulting firm who were asked to

make recommendations on our organisational

effectiveness, with particular emphasis on

corporate governance arrangements and the

roles and responsibilities across management

levels in the Department.

Substantial changes were proposed in relation

to:

• our officers’ roles and responsibilities;

• organisational structure and culture;

• employee performance monitoring and

appraisal systems;

• management behaviour and styles; and

• relationships with key clients.

Most of the consultant’s recommendations

were accepted and will be implemented over

the course of 2000-01.

The Treasury Management Review will result

in benefits to Treasury, its employees and our

customers.

The main outcomes will be:

• improved planning. Key strategic and

business planning systems are being

comprehensively overhauled. In addition,

four support committees have been

established to report direct to the

Corporate Executive on planning,

organisational development, finance and

audit, and information technology

matters. Improved strategic focus,

decision making and resource allocation

will result;

• better management. The existing Assistant

Under Treasurer positions will be replaced

with Executive Director positions. The

Executive Directors will have full

responsibility for their business units.

There will also be changes to the way in

which the Corporate Executive operates

which will see it less involved with

technical and day-to-day matters and

more involved in strategic planning,

directing and monitoring of Treasury’s

operations;



Overview

S p e c i a l F e a t u r e – T r e a s u r y M a n a g e m e n t R e v i e w

8


• greater clarity of the roles, responsibilities

and accountabilities of all staff. This will

provide staff with a clearer understanding

of what their job is. It will also facilitate

the delegation of policy and technical

work throughout the Department and

facilitate greater ownership by staff of the

work that they do. There will be a greater

devolution of responsibilities, particularly

from the Under Treasurer’s Office. As a

result officers will be more active in

working directly with agencies on

Treasury issues at all levels. They will also

have greater authority in determining

issues with agencies;

• systems to help manage and develop staff

and establish talent pools. In particular,

our Employee Development Scheme will

be revamped so that it provides better

feedback on how staff are going in their

jobs and what future opportunities are

available to them. It will also be better

linked to our new planning processes;

• a better structural organisation.

From 1 July 2000 a new organisational

structure will apply. A key change is the

establishment of the Agency Resources

business unit to look after both the

recurrent and capital departmental

budgets and governance at the non-

corporatised trading enterprises.



Our Mission

Treasury’s mission is to provide leadership in

advancing the State’s economic and financial

management.

The outcomes we seek to achieve are an

effective framework for:

• resourcing public services; and

• the development of a strong competitive

Western Australian economy.

More information on our outcomes and

outputs can be found in the Performance

Assessment section of this report.

Corporate Governance

There are a number of Acts that govern our

operations:

• we function under the Public Sector

Management Act for our general

administration;

• the Constitution Act and the Constitution

Acts Amendment Act provide the

framework under which we operate; and

• the Financial Administration and Audit Act,

and associated Treasurer’s Instructions,

provide the powers for our officers to

operate in government finance, control

and accountability matters.

A list of the Acts we administer is shown in

Appendix A.

Responsible Minister

The Hon. R.F. Court, B.Comm., MLA,

Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Public Sector

Management; and Federal Affairs.

Our Corporate Executive

At 30 June 2000 our Corporate Executive

comprised:

• Under Treasurer, John Langoulant;

• Assistant Under Treasurer (Economic),

Anne Nolan;

• Acting Assistant Under Treasurer

(Finance), David Smith;

• Acting Assistant Under Treasurer

(Resourcing), Andrew Chuk;

• Acting Assistant Under Treasurer (Asset

Financing), Robert Mianich; and

• Acting Director (Strategic Services),

Timothy Marney.

Electoral Act Disclosures

Under the Electoral Act we are required to

disclose any expenditures we make to

advertising agencies, market research

organisations, polling organisations, direct

mail organisations and media advertising

organisations.



Overview

T r e a s u r y a t a G l a n c e

10



For the year ended 30 June 2000, we incurred

the following amounts:

• $80,337 to advertise staff vacancies;

• $7,533 to advertise unclaimed moneys;

and

• $9,735 on customer satisfaction surveys.

Other Disclosures

Treasurer’s Instruction 903 requires senior

officers to disclose interests in any existing or

proposed contracts made with the

Department (excluding normal employment

contracts) or an affiliated body of the

Department. Our senior officers have no such

interests to disclose with respect to 1999-2000.

Our Structure

Treasury’s structure reflected its three critical

business areas. These are economic analysis,

financial assessment and management and

resourcing agencies. Key services provided by

these areas are as follows:

Economic

• analyse and advise government on State

revenues and the economy;

• monitor the impact of national tax reform

on the State’s finances;

• forecast economic trends and evaluate

major economic policy initiatives;

• advise on and coordinate

intergovernmental financial issues,

particularly relating to Commonwealth

grants to the State;

• analyse and advise on the performance of,

and strategic issues affecting, government

trading enterprises (like Western Power

and the Water Corporation);

• improve the corporate governance of the

business activities of government through

appropriate policy development;

Treasury’s Corporate Executive

(left to right) David Smith,

Andrew Chuk, John Langoulant,

Anne Nolan,Timothy Marney

and Robert Mianich


• coordinate and drive the implementationof the National Competition PolicyAgreements; and

• work with agencies and other jurisdictionsto make sure that the State’s laws andregulations appropriately serve the publicinterest.

Finance

• facilitate and advise on privatisations,rationalising major assets and arrangingalternative asset financing for publicsector services and activities;

• manage, or monitor the management of,various asset financing arrangements;

• manage the State vehicle fleet fundingfacility;

• develop policy on the financial andaccounting framework for governmentoperations;

• advise agencies on legislative andaccountability frameworks;

• maintain the Treasurer’s Accounts;

• manage investment of the government’scash resources and servicing of publicdebt;

• coordinate the strategic development ofTreasury and a wide range of activitiesthat, in combination, ensure we effectivelydeliver services to our customers; and

• provide information systems and internalaudit and risk management functions.

Resourcing

• advise government on the best way toallocate funds to achieve its desiredoutcomes;

• help agencies develop and manage theirannual budgets on an accrual outputbasis;

• administer the parliamentaryappropriation process and relatedbudgeting functions;

• prepare whole-of-government budgetsand financial reports;

• coordinate and monitor the State’sforecasts of financial aggregates includingrevenue, expenditure, assets andliabilities;

• research, develop, promote andimplement improved financialmanagement practices;

• evaluate and coordinate new expenditureproposals;

• manage the State’s real propertyefficiently and effectively;

• develop policies related to the ownershipinterests and capital expenditure activitiesof government;

• provide systems and coordination foragencies to manage and dispose ofproperty assets;

• provide central management forgovernment owned, multi-tenanted officebuildings;

• provide office accommodation services,including management of leasenegotiation and administration; and

• provide advice to government on thefinancial implications of wages policydecisions.


12 T R E A S U R Y D E P A R T M E N T

Overview



E C O N O M I C F I N A N C E R E S O U R C I N G

Under TreasurerJohn Langoulant

Executive OfficerExecutive Support

Yvonne Tavani

A/ManagerInternal AuditClaude Bonomi

A/Assistant Under TreasurerFinanceDavid Smith

A/AssistantUnder TreasurerResourcingAndrew Chuk

A/DirectorCapital and Ownership

Anthony Kannis

DirectorResourceManagementRay Illich

DirectorFiscal Policy

David Imber

A/DirectorStrategic Services

Timothy Marney

DirectorInformation SystemsDavid Cole

A/DirectorAccountingAdrian Duca

A/DirectorAsset FinancingDoug Tyler

DirectorGovernmentEnterprisesDonald Brunker

DirectorCompetition

PolicyDavid Morrison

A/DirectorIntergovernmentalRelationsAlex Scherini

Assistant UnderTreasurerEconomicAnne Nolan

DirectorEconomic

and Revenue Policy

Mark Altus

A/AssistantUnder TreasurerAsset FinancingRobert Mianich


Our Major Asset

Our people are our major asset. In recognition

of this we placed increasing emphasis on the

development of staff through training

programs and the introduction of a job

rotation scheme. We also introduced an

employee health program. The health and

wellbeing of our staff is pivotal to the

efficiency and effectiveness of the

Department.

Staffing

We employed 169 full time equivalent staff at

30 June 2000, compared with 180 a year

earlier (175 if the Government Property Office

staff who were part of Treasury at 30 June

1999 are excluded for comparative purposes).

Women made up 28 per cent of Treasury’s

workforce at 30 June 2000, compared with

29 per cent a year earlier. The following chart

provides a comparative break-up of males to

females on a classification basis. It shows that

our classification profile continues to show an

under-representation of women at more

senior levels.

Training and Development

Training was a focus during 1999-2000, with

an increasing emphasis on attendance at

conferences and seminars to augment the

more traditional training courses.



Overview

Our People

01

Level

5

10

15

20

25

30

Num

ber

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Class 1 Class 3 Class 4

Key

Male

Female


As a new initiative a Training Bulletin was

published in March 2000. The Bulletin

provides information on courses and training

schedules and is aimed at helping staff with

their training needs and development

programs identified through our Employee

Development Scheme. Bulletins are published

on a quarterly basis.

Particular attention was given to public

speaking and presentation skills training in

an effort to improve our skills in this area and

in recognition that increasingly our staff are

visiting customers to explain to them, and

gain their support for, our economic and

financial reforms.

Recruitment and selection was another area

of focus for our training. Basic training was

provided for staff needing to gain knowledge

of the selection process and our human

resource standards. Advanced training was

conducted for staff who were familiar with

these aspects of selection and who wanted to

improve their skills and ability to get the

right person.

In the second half of the year leadership and

management was identified as an area we

also needed to concentrate on.

Treasury became a corporate member of the

Australian Institute of Management in

March 2000. As well as attending some of

the Institute’s public training courses, staff

attended the various international seminars

run on topics such as management and

leadership.

This allowed for increased networking

opportunities with counterparts in other

agencies and the private sector.

A Job Rotation Program was introduced to

assist with the career development of our

people and to enhance organisational

communications and flexibility, thereby

enabling Treasury to adapt to an increasingly

demanding operating environment.

Graduate Development Scheme

Our Graduate Development Scheme was

comprehensively overhauled two years ago.

The new Scheme encompasses a much greater

role for senior managers in both the

recruitment process and in the development

of the graduates once they have commenced

at Treasury.


Graduate Development

Scheme members -

Leanne Follows,

Audrey Formentin and

Leonie Buktenica


Overview

The new Scheme is producing good results

with very high calibre graduates having been

recruited in each of the past two years. As a

result of the success of the new Scheme, we

plan to increase our graduate intake for 2001.

Public Sector Standards

We have policies and procedures in place

which are consistent with the guidelines for

public sector standards that have been issued

by the Office of the Public Sector Standards

Commissioner.

The standards were first developed using a

participative approach with staff. To ensure

that new staff are familiar with the standards

they form part of the induction process for

new employees. In addition, the standards are

available for viewing on our Intranet facility,

are included in Treasury’s Policy

Compendium and marketed from time to

time in our internal newsletter, Inside

Treasury.

Training in recruitment and selection was

used to reinforce knowledge of the selection

process and the standards.

There were no formal applications claiming a

breach of the standards during 1999-2000.



Our Help Desk Team -

Rodney George,

Graham Daniell,

Shayne Nedselsky and

Silvano Ciavatta


Code of Conduct

Treasury has a Code of Conduct that draws

from the principles of natural justice, respect

for persons and responsible care as embodied

in the Western Australian Public Sector Code

of Ethics. Our Code of Conduct provides a

guide for our officers in understanding their

rights and obligations, including the ethical

behaviours and values expected of them in

their day to day work.

Our Code of Conduct was developed using a

consultative approach and so there is a good

level of awareness about it amongst staff. It is

available for viewing on our Intranet facility.

Equal Opportunity

We are an equal opportunity employer and

encourage and support diversity in the

workplace.

We have a set of equal opportunity,

harassment and grievance policies and

procedures that were developed by our staff,

based on the general public sector standards.

These policies apply to everyone in the

Department and can be accessed through our

Intranet facility.

Trained grievance officers are available to

staff for counselling and for resolving

disputes.

Safety, Health and Welfare

The Department’s performance in relation to

the safety and health of employees is

monitored in part through workers’

compensation and rehabilitation statistics.

These show that there was one workers’

compensation claim during 1999-2000.

Workers’ Compensation Indicators

1998-99 1999-2000

Frequency rate(a) nil nil

Estimated cost of claims(b) nil nil

Premium ratepercent(c) 0.63 0.66

Rehabilitationsuccess rate na na

(a) Relates the number of lost time incidents, whereone or more days were lost, to total hours worked.

(b) Cost incurred per $100 of our annual payroll.(c) Premium is calculated as a proportion of our annual

payroll.na denotes not applicable

We recognise that the health and wellbeing of

our staff is important to the achievement of

our overall strategic objectives. In view of

this, and to foster a more rewarding and

caring work environment, we introduced an

employee health program in March 2000.



The program consists of four components:

• health assessments – such as healthy heart

checks;

• promotion of exercise and fitness – for

example aerobics classes;

• stress management and relaxation –

including in-house workshops and yoga

classes; and

• information sessions – for example on

parenting and nutrition.

The first initiatives under this program have

been the provision of flu vaccinations and a

revised eyesight policy.

Communications

As a new initiative the Under Treasurer

commenced a process of quarterly briefings to

all staff. The first briefing was held in May

and was used to inform staff about the

Treasury Management Review (see feature

article).

Employee Relations

We have available for our staff a choice of

either an Enterprise Bargaining Agreement or

a Workplace Agreement.

The vast majority of our staff are signatories

to our Workplace Agreement, which is

available in 38 and 40 hour options.

In February 2000 a new Workplace Agreement

was registered. The new Agreement, which

was written so as to be more reader friendly,

has as its key initiative the introduction of

annual accrual of long service leave after the

first seven years of service.

This initiative seeks to make the taking of

long service leave more manageable, thereby

encouraging staff to take leave more

frequently, albeit in smaller amounts.

This initiative was one strategy we

introduced in an effort to better manage our

leave liability which at 30 June 2000 totalled

$3.4 million. A leave policy has been

introduced which places a limit on the total

amount of leave staff can have at any one

time.

Acting on the suggestion of a staff member,

we introduced service awards for staff who

had attained 15, 25 and 35 years in the public

sector. In recognition of the contribution

made by these people recipients are presented

with a framed certificate and for 25 and 35

years service an engraved pen.

Disability Services

We seek to ensure that:

• our functions and services meet the needs

of people with disabilities;

• access to buildings and facilities are

improved;

• information on facilities and services is

provided in formats that enhance the

communication needs of people with

disabilities;



Overview



• advice and services are delivered by staff

who are aware of and understand the

needs of people with disabilities; and

• opportunities are provided for people

with disabilities to participate in public

consultations, grievance mechanisms and

decision making processes that are

available to other members of the public.

During 1999-2000, there were no approaches

made from the public for services to be

modified to meet the needs of persons with

disabilities.

We continued to assist the operations of the

Technical Aid for the Disabled group by

donating to them our outdated computing

equipment.

Technical Aid for the Disabled provides a

long-term loan service of computers to

disabled people to assist them to

communicate with others, gain new skills and

in many cases gain employment.

Donations to Charity

The last Friday of each month is ‘casual for a

cause day’ at Treasury. Staff are encouraged

to come to work dressed casually and to

make a donation which is on-passed to a

different charity each month. Amongst the

recipients have been Princess Margaret

Hospital, the Cerebral Palsy Association of

Western Australia, the Australian Cancer

Research Foundation and the Leukaemia

Foundation.

Thirty-five years Service

Award Presentation


Our Customers

Our major customers are:

• the Treasurer and the Minister Assisting

the Treasurer;

• Cabinet and its Committees;

• Parliament; and

• the State’s public sector agencies.

Our Customer Commitment

Our customers can expect from us a

commitment to quality and responsive

services. We do this by:

• ensuring that our advice is clear, well

founded, timely and relevant;

• establishing clear points of contact for a

coordinated and effective service;

• understanding our customers’ needs and

helping them understand our views;

• streamlining our requests for information

from customers;

• consulting with our customers when

reviewing our practices;

• seeking customer feedback and acting on it;

• responding to requests for advice and

information within agreed time frames;

and

• keeping our customers informed of the

latest developments in economic and

financial management policies and

procedures.

Achieving Customer Focus

To gauge our customer effectiveness we

conduct a client/stakeholder survey each

year. The survey results provide valuable

feedback about areas where we can make

improvements. The results of the survey for

1999-2000 are outlined in the Performance

Assessment section of this report.

Our Customer Service Charter was reviewed

during the year and an updated brochure

provided to all ministers, members of

Parliament and chief executive officers.

Improved communications with our

customers was a focus.

To this end we:

• ensured interested parties had the

opportunity to provide input on

important and controversial issues

relating to National Competition Policy;

• provided numerous seminars and

presentations on tax reform and

implications for State finances,

government agencies, the economy and

the community;



Overview

C u s t o m e r F o c u s



• used Treasury News and other

publications to inform customers about

developments in matters such as financial

management, tax reform and the

Commonwealth Grants Commission

process;

• consulted with agencies on financial

management reforms through forums

such as the Financial Reform Consultative

Committee and a briefing for chief

executives; and

• set up a Goods and Services Tax

implementation unit to assist the State

public sector prepare for the introduction

of the Tax.

We also sought to reduce ‘red tape’ by

coordinating National Competition Policy

legislation reviews, many of which

recommended removing unduly restrictive

laws, such as those restricting the services

water boards can offer or preventing a

university establishing a Trust fund. We also

participated in national efforts to promote

consistency in laws governing areas such as

road transport, water management, gas

pipelines and health professions.

Your Say

We are constantly striving to improve our

service and welcome your suggestions on

how this can be achieved. If you have any

comments, or would like to discuss any of

our services, please call us. Contact details are

provided at the back of this report.

Treasury's GST Implementation Unit -

John Nicolaou, Michael McLure and Chris Rodgers





Activities

Provides advice and analysis on State

revenues, the economy, intergovernmental

financial relations, government trading

enterprises and competition policy.

Key Achievements

During 1999-2000 the Economic area:

• reported to the National Competition

Council on progress in implementing a

range of specific reforms required by

National Competition Policy. The

Council assesses the extent to which the

States and Territories have met their

National Competition Policy obligations

and recommends whether they should be

paid. Our reporting contributed to

Western Australia being recommended to

receive its full payment for 2000-01;

• continued to develop Treasury’s general

equilibrium modelling capacity, and

undertook modelling projects in

partnership with other agencies;

• negotiated with the Commonwealth for

settlement of its $79.1 million obligations

under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands)

Act 1967. This settlement brought to an

end some complicated payment

arrangements with the Commonwealth.

The benefits will include greater

administrative efficiencies in the payment

of petroleum revenue between the

Commonwealth and the States;

• provided detailed submissions and

presentations to Standard and Poor’s and

Moody’s ratings agencies, contributing to

both agencies maintaining the State’s

AAA credit rating;

Anne NolanAssistant UnderTreasurer

Mark AltusDirector, Economic and Revenue Policy

Donald BrunkerDirector, GovernmentEnterprises

David MorrisonDirector,Competition Policy

Alex ScheriniActing Director,IntergovernmentalRelations

E c o n o m i c

22


• contributed to several submissions to

the Commonwealth highlighting the

potential economic costs to the State of

actions to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions. Also played a key role in

advocating that the Liquefied Natural Gas

industry be given special consideration

under any emission reduction measures

employed, given the environmental

benefits of increased natural gas usage;

• published an updated and revised policy

paper on community service obligations.

The paper outlined the Government’s

preferred approach to the identification,

costing and funding of these obligations.

The policy also outlines the process for

having new Community Service

Obligations recognised and also requires a

periodic review of existing obligations;

• advised on a range of competition policy

matters including:

– access to essential infrastructure for

rail, the electricity grid and gas

pipelines to facilitate competition.

Improved access will lessen monopoly

effects, significantly benefit existing

and future consumers and suppliers of

these products. However, it requires

careful balancing between the need to

encourage competition, through better

access, while also providing sufficient

incentive to invest significant

infrastructure facilities;

– on the conduct of legislation,

competitive neutrality and structural

reform reviews, contributing to the

completion of 130 legislation reviews

by the end of 1999-2000;

– the New Tax System Price Exploitation

Code (Western Australia) Act 1999 which

enables the Australian Competition

and Consumer Commission to monitor

prices and take action on Goods and

Services Tax exploitation of consumers

by businesses outside the

Commonwealth’s constitutional power

(ie. unincorporated entities); and

– the First Home Owner Grant Act 2000.

This legislation provides a $7,000 grant

to first home buyers to help offset the

impact of the Goods and Services Tax

on house prices;


Members of the

Community Service

Obligations team -

Corey Dykstra and

Donald Brunker


• coordinated the preparation of

legislation to implement tax reform.

The Intergovernmental Agreement on the

Reform of Commonwealth-State Financial

Relations (signed by all jurisdictions in

June 1999) required Western Australia to

undertake a range of legislative measures

to implement its commitments under tax

reform. The legislation included:

– the Financial Relations Agreement

(Consequential Provisions) Act 1999. This

legislation included the State’s

commitment to comply with, and give

effect to, the Intergovernmental

Agreement, abolishes financial

institutions duty and stamp duty on

listed shares from 1 July 2001, and

abolished off-road diesel fuel subsidies

from 1 July 2000; and

– the State Entities (Payments) Act 1999

which enables all State government

entities to operate as if they were

subject to the Commonwealth’s Goods

and Services Tax legislation (to ensure

that the tax is neutral between the

government and private sectors);

• worked with the Commonwealth in

finalising a detailed paper on the

calculation of the guarantee payments

designed to ensure that States would be

no worse off under the national tax

reform;

• compiled the list of State taxes and

charges to be tax free under the

Commonwealth’s Goods and Services

Tax legislation;

• addressed issues relating to the

implementation of tax reform in the

government sector, including agency

savings from tax reform and adjustments

to fees and charges;

• oversaw the commencement of new

intergovernmental processes associated

with tax reform. These included the first

meeting in March 2000 of the Ministerial

Council which has oversight of the tax

reforms, and the establishment of the

Goods and Services Tax Administration

Sub-Committee to monitor Goods and

Services Tax operational and policy issues;

• coordinated the State’s participation in

the Commonwealth Grants

Commission’s Indigenous Funding

Inquiry, which is due to report in March

2001. This inquiry is reviewing the

allocation of Commonwealth funding for

indigenous services between both

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

Commission regions and States. The

State’s participation included a

comprehensive submission, attendance at

a Grants Commission conference, and

meetings with the Commission;

• progressed reform of Commonwealth

specific purpose payments and better

reporting of these payments. The

Commonwealth Department of Finance,

Commonwealth Treasury and all State and

Territory Treasuries jointly developed best

practice guidelines for improving the

efficiency and effectiveness of specific

purpose payments. In addition, it has

been agreed that the Commonwealth will





compile a database of specific purpose

payments; and

• coordinated the development of a draft

Memorandum of Understanding between

the State and local governments in

Western Australia, to enhance cooperation

and coordination between these sectors of

government.

Future Directions

Our key goals for 2000-01 are to:

• analyse the impact of the

Commonwealth’s environmental

commitments (eg. the Kyoto Protocol) on

the State’s economy;

• contribute, through discussion papers, to

debate on current and emerging public

policy issues impacting, or likely to

impact, on the State’s economy;

• coordinate the implementation of the

National Tax Equivalent Regime in

Western Australia;

• ensure that National Competition Policy

reviews that are of greatest potential

impact on the economy and/or are

controversial are conducted with

analytical rigour and an appropriate

degree of independence and consultation;

• prepare the State’s report to the National

Competition Council, required in March

2001;

• advise on the implementation of access

arrangements, to achieve a balance

between the competing interests of

infrastructure investors and competitive

pricing;

• prepare, with Parliamentary Counsel, a

second omnibus Bill to implement

legislative amendments recommended by

Competition Policy reviews;

• provide advice to reviews of regulatory

arrangements, both nationally and within

the State, that will have significant impact

on community welfare;

• monitor the impact of tax reform on the

State’s finances, including the impact on

own-source revenues;

• continue efforts to reform Commonwealth

specific purpose payments to maximise

their efficiency and effectiveness;

• continue to support and develop

improvements in processes relating to

State/local government financial relations;

and

• contribute to the Commonwealth Grants

Commission’s inquiries into indigenous

funding, the methods of distributing

general purpose grants between local

governments, and methods for allocating

Goods and Services Tax revenues between

the States.



Activities

Advises on accounting policy and

frameworks for government operations.

Participates in rationalising major assets.

Provides corporate and information systems,

including strategic and internal audit

services.

Key Achievements

During 1999-2000 the Finance area:

• assisted agencies prepare for the

introduction of the Goods and Services

Tax through establishment of a Goods and

Services Tax coordinators network and

provision of advice and liaison with the

Australian Taxation Office;

• visited 49 agencies to advise on

management reporting best practice and

promote the use of accrual accounting

concepts. Improved accounting by

agencies, consistent with financial reforms

developed in recent years, has been

evident;

• successfully completed the transfer of

the State’s banking business to the

Commonwealth Bank. This complex

project involved 140 agencies and

568 bank accounts. The transfer provides

significant savings on banking charges

and a wider range of services than was

available previously.

The Commonwealth Bank was also

selected as the preferred tenderer for the

provision of a Merchant Service facility to

State agencies. This will further reduce

cost and provide greater flexibility for

those making payments to government

agencies;

• achieved a return on short term

investments (5.35 per cent) in excess of

the cash management benchmark

(5.08 per cent), continuing the trend of

the 1990s in management of the public

bank account. The average daily balance

of the investment pool for the year was

$990 million;




David SmithActing Assistant Under Treasurer

Adrian DucaActing Director,Accounting

ClaudeBonomiActing Manager,Internal Audit

David ColeDirector,Information Systems

F i n a n c e

TimothyMarneyActing Director,Strategic Services

Doug TylerActing Director,Asset Financing



• undertook a major review of our role and

operations over the first half of 2000. The

review was conducted with the help of an

external consultant and involved wide

consultation with our employees and

customers.

The Treasury Management Review, which

incorporates a major restructuring of the

Department, will provide benefits to

Treasury, its employees and staff (see

Special Feature section of this Report);

• undertook a comprehensive review of

our planning processes that will provide

us with a clearer focus for our

operations. The new planning process will

allow us to concentrate on what is truly

strategic to our operations and will result

in our planning processes being integrated

more fully with our day-to-day work;

Banking Implementation Team -

Colin Santa Maria, Ray Willis,

Lee-Anne Donaldson and

Josef Netolicky


• implemented a Disaster Recovery Plan to

ensure we could resume critical functions

as quickly as possible in the event of a

disaster. The plan is one of a number of

strategies in our overall risk management

approach to business planning and

development;

• successfully managed the Year 2000 issue

and introduction of the Goods and

Services Tax thereby avoiding any

disruption to Treasury’s business

activities; and

• helped progress the sale of AlintaGas

and the Westrail Freight business.

The sale of AlintaGas is progressing in the

context of continuing reforms in the

energy sector. The State has decided to sell

the securities in AlintaGas in a process

involving the sale of 45 per cent of the

securities to a cornerstone shareholder

with the balance of the securities to be

sold by a public offer.

It was announced in May 2000 that

Westrail Freight will be offered for sale.

The Rail Freight System Act 2000 (WA)

enables the sale to proceed.

Future Directions

Our key goals for 2000–01 are to:

• review the Financial Administration and

Audit Act including related Regulations

and Treasurer’s Instructions.

Implementation of recent and continuing

financial management reforms – such as

output based management, accrual

budgeting and devolved bank accounts -

is becoming increasingly difficult within

the existing Act. The original Act was

drafted to accommodate cashbook

accounting and central responsibility for

bookkeeping and banking functions, with

limited devolution to agencies for

financial management;

• implement the Treasury Management

Review initiatives;

• undertake an Employee Opinion Survey

to obtain a better grasp of the

organisational development issues we face

and to obtain employee’s views on a range

of issues; and

• continue to assist with the sale of

AlintaGas and the Westrail Freight

business.






Activities

Advises on and manages the allocation of

taxpayers’ resources to achieve government

outcomes. Provides fiscal policy advice and

financial monitoring and reporting services.

Provides government property related policy,

advice and information.

Key Achievements

During 1999-2000 the Resourcing area:

• contributed significantly to the

production of the State budget which

was presented on time and which received

positive comment from users, particularly

in relation to the clarity of the information

which, for the first time, was presented in

an accrual government finance statistics

format;

• worked closely with agencies to improve

output performance measures. The

accuracy and relevance of output

measures is critical in assisting

government with its budget formulation

process as well as fulfilling output

performance reporting requirements of

agencies. The output measures published

in the 1999-2000 Budget Papers are a

marked improvement on measures

published in the previous year. However,

further work is required to enhance these

measures and, in some cases, for agencies

to implement systems to monitor

performance against these measures

throughout the year;

• commenced Quarterly Output Acquittals.

The acquittals identify variances between

agreed and actual performance against

budget and, where appropriate, proposes

corrective action or modification to

purchase price/supply of output.

Some agencies experienced teething

difficulties with this process. Our staff

continue to work closely with these

agencies to improve the quality and

relevance of the measures;

Andrew ChukActing AssistantUnder Treasurer

Ray IllichDirector,Resource Management

David ImberDirector,Fiscal Policy

Anthony KannisActing Director,Capital and Ownership

R e s o u r c i n g


• completed the development of the

Purchasing and Analysing Outputs

Manual. This manual will help:

– develop agency output structures,

measures and targets;

– implement a framework for reporting

and using output performance

information;

– analyse output delivery in terms of

quantity, quality, timeliness and cost;

– formulate recommendations to

government on the purchase of

outputs to achieve government desired

outcomes; and

– establish the link between financial

reforms such as Output Based

Management, performance reporting

and accrual output budgeting;

• negotiated the passage through

Parliament of the Government Financial

Responsibility Act, which received Royal

Assent on 5 July 2000. The Act establishes

a framework for government financial

planning and reporting to facilitate public

scrutiny of government financial policy

and performance. It contains financial

management principles for the

government to adhere to when setting its

financial plans and places reporting

requirements on the government for it to

release:

– a Financial Strategy Statement at least

once in each calendar year;

– a Financial Projections Statement with

each annual State Budget;

– a Mid-Year Financial Projections

Statement no later than 31 December

each year;

– a Financial Results Report no later

than 30 September each year; and

– a pre-election Financial Projections

Statement within 10 days after the

Legislative Assembly is dissolved or

expires;

• introduced the Financial Administration

Amendment Bill to Parliament, to

facilitate the introduction of accrual

appropriations, a capital user charge and

e-commerce. The Bill was passed through

the Legislative Assembly. The Legislative

Council has referred the Bill to the

Standing Committee on Estimates and

Financial Operations. Treasury has

participated in discussions and formal

hearings with members of the Standing

Committee on a regular basis, and it is

expected that the Standing Committee will

finalise its report on the Bill in the first

quarter of 2000-01;

• commenced the Treasury Information

Management System project to improve

agency data exchange and to better

manage budget estimates and production

of government-wide financial information;






• provided financial and economic advice

on a number of proposed major

government investments including the

Oakajee Deepwater Port, the Perth

Convention Centre and the Jervoise Bay

Marine Offshore Construction Facility;

and

• developed Project Evaluation Guidelines

to assist agencies to apply a consistent and

rigorous approach to major investment

decisions.

Future Directions

Our key goals for 2000-01 are to:

• complete the implementation of the

Output Based Management financial

reform. This is an activity based

information approach aimed at assisting

agencies and government to resource the

outputs required to achieve the

government's outcomes.

For Output Based Management to work

successfully it is critical that there is

adequate monitoring and assessment of

results. Through regular monitoring of

agency outputs, agency managers are

Treasury Information

Management System

Project Team





better placed to identify problems as they

emerge and to improve on service

delivery. This allows any corrective action

that may be required to be undertaken in

a timely manner rather than near year

end.

The quarterly output acquittal process will

acquire a sharper focus with the

introduction of the accrual output

appropriation regime in 2001-02. Under

the proposed regime, and consistent with

Australian accounting standards, revenue

recognition by agencies will only be

possible for outputs that are acquitted

under the quarterly output acquittals

process. The process of output acquittal

will therefore be necessary for agencies

and Treasury to properly account for

revenue, liabilities and assets.

These quarterly reports will also improve

the robustness of the mechanisms which

enforce service delivery and mark a

fundamental change from funding

agencies' operational expenditure to

purchasing outputs at a competitive price;

• implement accrual appropriations and a

capital user charge for the 2001-02 State

Budget, subject to timely passage of the

Financial Administration and Audit

Amendment Bill through Parliament;

• undertake a review of the issues that

determine the extent to which government

should lease, own or otherwise procure its

commercial property requirements.

The review will produce a policy

incorporating guiding principles to aid

decision making for the Treasury portfolio

and at agency level; and

• implement the Treasury Information

Management System.



Financial Summary





O p i n i o n o f t h e A u d i t o r G e n e r a l



Treasurer’s Instruction 905

Financial Administration and Audit Act 1985

I hereby certify that the performance indicators are based on proper records and fairly

represent the performance of the Treasury Department for the year ended 30 June 2000.

J L Langoulant

UNDER TREASURER

15 August 2000

C e r t i f i c a t i o n o f P e r f o r m a n c e I n d i c a t o r s


Our Outcomes

The outcomes we seek to achieve are an

effective framework for:

• resourcing public services; and

• the development of a strong, competitive

economy. (This is a revised outcome to

that published in the 1999-2000 Budget

Papers and it better reflects our economic

advisory role, as detailed in the 2000-01

Budget Papers).

Our Outputs

We aim to achieve these outcomes through:

• the policy advice we provide to

government;

• the systems we provide to assist with

economic and financial management and

financial reporting for government

accountability; and

• the implementation of arrangements and

strategies to help government allocate and

manage resources and deliver services

more efficiently.

Measuring Our Performance

Treasury’s role in achieving its outcomes and

outputs is primarily that of an economic and

financial management adviser to the

government and its agencies. We have

measured our performance (effectiveness,

quality, and timeliness) primarily through a

survey of our key clients/stakeholders.

Detailed questions were asked of each client

group to elicit meaningful responses and to

obtain a good understanding of how our

clients/stakeholders view our performance.

Responses to the detailed questions were

grouped to obtain the performance indicators

for outcomes (effectiveness) and outputs

(quality and timeliness).

In previous years we have experienced

difficulty in linking our effectiveness

performance indicators to our stated

outcomes. To address this shortcoming a

broader more direct approach has been taken.

This shift in approach has resulted in

effectiveness measures moving away from an

output emphasis to that of outcomes with a

focus on:

• Financial Management:

– resource allocation;

– resource management;

– public sector accountability; and

– service delivery;




P e r f o r m a n c e A s s e s s m e n t


• Economic Management:

– information for decision making.

This change in approach has meant that

comparisons between effectiveness indicators

previously published and those developed for

the current survey are not meaningful.

Accordingly, interpretation of the series of

effectiveness performance measures must

recognise the break in the data due to this

change.

Survey results pertaining to output

performance measures are considered

comparable, with many of the questions used

in previous surveys being asked in the

current survey. Where changes were made,

they were only slight and focused the

question(s) more to the sample types being

surveyed.

Non-survey based effectiveness indicators

have been included to help measure

performance in both outcome and output

areas. The use of in-house data complements

the survey based results and adds scope and

objectivity to the sources of information used

in gauging our performance.

The efficiency indicators have been sourced

from information held on our output

measurement system.

The Client Survey

The client/stakeholder survey was

undertaken on our behalf by an external

consultant in July 2000 through a

telephone-based questionnaire.

255 stakeholders were approached, with

interviews held with 149, a response rate of

58 per cent. The numbers sampled and

responses were as follows:

Client/Stakeholder Total ResponsesGroupings Surveyed

Ministers 17 11Chiefs of Staff 14 9Members of

Parliament 76 44Agencies 141 82Economic

and FinancialCommentators 7 3

Total 255 149

Interview questions were aimed specifically

at each market segment.



Effectiveness Indicators (Audited)

Outcome 1:An effective framework for

resourcing public services.

The framework referred to in this outcome

contains a range of financial management

initiatives designed to improve the resource

allocation, performance management and

accountability of agencies and government.

The key components of the framework are:

• accrual financial reporting;

• output based management – identification

of outcomes and outputs, accrual output

budgets combined with output

performance measures and targets;

• presentation of whole of government

financial statements in accordance with

external reporting standards; and

• a legislated financial planning, targeting

and reporting process incorporating the

disclosure of the government’s budget

strategy, financial projections and periodic

reporting including actual results against

targets and quarterly acquittal reports

against budget targets.

Taking the above attributes into

consideration, the framework for resourcing

public services is considered effective if it:

• improves public sector resource allocation

and management;

• increases accountability; and

• enhances public sector service delivery.

Indicators of effectiveness include:

• the extent to which public sector resource

allocation and management has improved,

as indicated by the number and

percentage of clients/stakeholders who

indicate:

– improvement in the resource allocation

process;

– that our financial management

initiatives have assisted them in

improving their resource management

processes;

• the extent to which public sector

accountability has increased as indicated

by the number and percentage of:

– agencies that comply with our

accountability reporting requirements;

– clients/stakeholders who indicate that

implementation of financial

management initiatives have increased

public sector accountability; and

• the extent to which public sector service

delivery has been enhanced, as indicated

by the number and percentage of

clients/stakeholders who indicate that our

financial management initiatives have

assisted them to improve service delivery.





(A) The extent to which public sector

resource allocation and management

processes have improved.

We play a major role in the resource

allocation process through our accrual output

based management initiative. This initiative

provides the basis for the contestable

allocation and management of public sector

resources. It aims to improve the budget

process by focussing decision makers on

outputs generated from the expenditure of

public funds and assist managers in their

allocation and management of public sector

resources.

Clients/stakeholders indicating animprovement in the resource

allocation process in 1999-2000

Total No. of Respondees Indicating Respondees Improvement

Number Per cent

77 33 43

The 77 respondees represent a 49 per cent

response rate out of a total of

158 clients/stakeholders (ministers

and agencies) surveyed.

There were significant differences in the

survey results with ministers providing the

highest ratings of improvement at 78 per cent

through to agencies, which recorded the

lowest measure of 34 per cent. This wide

range in responses may be attributable to the

settling in of the large number of budget

related reforms that have been implemented

since 1998-99. These reforms have impacted

most on those sample groups which

responded with low improvement ratings.

We will continue to work with these

clients/stakeholders to enhance their

understanding of the new initiatives.

Treasury’s financial management initiatives

have been developed to assist agencies

improve their resource management

processes.

Clients/stakeholders who consider ourfinancial management initiatives haveimproved their resource management

processes in 1999-2000

Total No. of Respondees IndicatingRespondees Improvement

Number Per cent

124 61 49


response rate out of a total of 248

clients/stakeholders surveyed.

This result was drawn from all sample types

with ministers and members of Parliament

recording high improvement ratings (90 per

cent and 73 per cent respectively) through to

agencies with a low improvement rating of

31 per cent.

This result aligns with the responses recorded

for the previous measure (by sample type)

and requires working with agencies in

building their confidence in the resource

management reforms being promoted by us.



(B) The extent to which public sector

accountability has increased.

We undertake monitoring and reporting of

agency output delivery performance through

quarterly whole of government and output

acquittal reports.

The high level of whole of government

returns, in comparison with the acquittal

returns, is explained by the former process

having been in place for a longer period of

time.

The financial management initiatives we

implemented are intended to promote

increased public sector accountability through

an improved budget process, the adoption of

good business practices and the

empowerment of managers and employees.

The initiatives include changing the budget

management process to an output process,

introducing accrual budget appropriations

and associated reporting, enhancing

performance measurement and targeting,

establishing separate agency bank accounts,

etc.

Clients/stakeholders who indicatedTreasury’s financial management initiativeshave increased public sector accountability

in 1999-2000

Total No. of Respondees Indicating Respondees Increased Accountability

Number Per cent

133 92 69



255 clients/stakeholders surveyed.

The effectiveness response rating was high

and fairly consistent across all client/

stakeholder sample types. This was an

encouraging result, which supported the




The number of agencies that submitted accountability returns for 1999-2000

Total No. of Agencies Number of Agencies Percentage of Agencies Submitting Returns Submitting Returns

Quarterly Whole of Quarterly Whole of Quarterly Whole ofAcquittal Government Acquittal Government Acquittal GovernmentReturns Returns(a) Returns Returns(a) Returns Returns(a)

% %

September 80 168 65 166 81 98.8December 80 166 61 164 76 98.8March 80 169 59 167 74 98.8June(b) na na na na na na

(a) All public sector agencies are required to provide a set of financial statements (Operating Statement, BalanceSheet and Statements of Cash flow) covering their year to date position, on a quarterly basis.

(b) June data were not available at the time of publication. However, it will be reported in 2000-01.



overall benefits to government flowing from

the financial management reforms introduced

over the past two years.

(C) The extent to which public sector

service delivery has been enhanced.

Financial management initiatives we

promoted support the output/outcome

approach in meeting service delivery

improvements.

Client/stakeholders indicating that ourfinancial management initiatives assistedthem to improve their service delivery

in 1999-2000

Total No. of Respondees Indicating Respondees Improvement

Number Per cent

114 44 39


response rate out of a total of 255

clients/stakeholders surveyed.

The survey results varied considerably, with a

high improvement rating of 88 per cent

recorded from ministers through to a low

rating recorded from agencies of 25 per cent.

The low improvement rating results received

from those who were most directly impacted

by the new financial management initiatives

can be attributed to the early stage of the

transition in the budget process to a focus

on output based decision making. An

improvement in the ratings for this measure

is expected as this transition proceeds and as

the full year benefits of enhanced budget

monitoring and management based on

accrual output based measures is

implemented in 2000-01.

The ability to monitor performance targets

and measure outputs against desired

outcomes will be an increasingly important

factor in gauging service delivery

improvements.

We will be working to assist agencies and

government businesses in improving their

service delivery through this approach.

Outcome 2: An effective framework for

development of a strong, competitive

economy.

An effective framework for development of a

strong, competitive economy is important in

maintaining the State’s high standard of

living. It is particularly important for the

Western Australian economy to remain

competitive given its export orientation and

the pressures of globalisation.

While the Federal Government controls

macroeconomic policy (national fiscal,

monetary and tariff policy), the State

Government’s role is primarily to develop

efficient revenue systems, economic and

social infrastructure and supporting services

at as low a cost as possible, and to ensure

support for, and implementation of, national

economic policies (eg National Competition

Policy).


The framework for development of a strong,

competitive economy is one where:

• clients/stakeholders make informed

decisions based on an increased awareness

of economic matters and trends; and

• systems for collecting revenue are

efficient. A tax system impacts on decision

making (eg investment, savings and

consumption). However, broad-based

taxes levied on a growing tax base (eg

payroll, property, motor vehicle and

gambling taxes) tend to be more desirable

as they are less distortionary in terms of

their impact on decisions.

Grants from the Commonwealth

Government may be tied, such as specific

purpose payments, or untied, such as

financial assistance grants. Untied grants

are preferable because financial resources

can be allocated to where they will have

most impact. Other problems with tied

grants include a focus on program inputs

rather than outcomes, duplication of roles

and responsibilities, high compliance and

administration costs, blurred

accountability to clients and a lack of

consultation between Commonwealth and

State agencies; and

• government businesses (public

non-financial corporations and public

financial corporations as defined by the

Australian Bureau of Statistics and

reported in Budget Paper No. 3 –

“Economic and Fiscal Outlook”) adopt a

commercial approach in the provision of

economic and social infrastructure.

The provision of economic and social

infrastructure in a commercial manner

encourages government businesses to

minimise operating costs, ensure that

prices reflect the cost of providing goods

and services, and explore opportunities

for adding value to the business. These

outcomes in turn act to encourage the

establishment of economic activity within

the State on a sustainable economic and

financial basis.

A framework for developing a strong

competitive economy is considered effective if

it:

• assists clients/stakeholders to make

informed decisions by increasing their

awareness of economic matters and

trends;

• improves the efficiency of revenue

systems; and

• promotes a more commercial approach

by government businesses.

Indicators of effectiveness include:

• the extent to which clients/stakeholders

indicate that information on economic

matters and trends has increased their

awareness and assisted with their decision

making. This is measured by the

percentage of clients/stakeholders who

indicate that the information we provide

on economic matters and trends has

increased their awareness and assisted in

their decision making. This includes

information on economic conditions

impacting on the State’s growth prospects






and revenue collections, and

intergovernmental relations impacting on

Commonwealth funding received by the

State;

• the extent to which the efficiency of

revenue systems has improved as

measured by the percentage of the State

tax revenue raised from broad-based taxes

levied on a growing tax base and the

percentage of Commonwealth

Government funding received as untied

grants; and

• the extent to which a more commercial

approach is being adopted by government

businesses which have been corporatised,

commercialised or are subject to separate

accountability arrangements.

Separate accountability arrangements for

business activities within government

businesses, which themselves have not been

corporatised or commercialised, act to

provide incentives for more commercial

behaviour as these arrangements enable the

performance of these activities to be

separately monitored and benchmarked.

(A) The extent to which

clients/stakeholders indicated that

information on economic matters and

trends increased their awareness and

assisted with their decision making.

Treasury provides advice and produces a

number of publications to assist

clients/stakeholders improve their ability to

make informed decisions in respect to

economic matters and trends.

Clients/stakeholders who consider theinformation we provided increased theirawareness and assisted in their decision

making in 1999-2000

Total No. of Respondees IndicatingRespondees Increased Awareness

Number Per cent

125 80 64



255 clients/stakeholders surveyed.

All client/stakeholder sample types were

canvassed in respect to this measure.

While there was some variations in the results

across the sample types, most were positive,

with a ‘very effective’ rating of 15 per cent

recorded as part of the overall effectiveness

rating of 64 per cent. This result is

encouraging and we will continue to

investigate better ways of keeping out

clients/stakeholders informed on economic

matters.


(B) The extent to which the efficiency of

revenue systems has improved.

• Own Source Revenue

Broad based taxes levied on a growing tax

base enable funds to be raised for essential

government goods and services while

keeping distortions in producer and

consumer behaviour to a minimum.

Percentage of State tax revenue raised

from broad-based taxes levied on a

growing tax base

n.a. denotes not available

The results indicate a consistency in

movement towards broad-based taxes.

• Commonwealth Grants

Untied Commonwealth grants allow the State

to allocate resources to their most productive

uses.

Commonwealth Government funding

received as untied grants

Sourced from Commonwealth budget papers.

(a) These figures exclude ‘Safety Net Revenues’ of$696,934,176 in 1997-98, $903,235,987 in 1998-99and $924,260,786 in 1999-2000.These werepreviously State sourced revenues but due to aHigh Court ruling in 1997 they are now collectedon behalf of the State by the CommonwealthGovernment and as such are not consideredCommonwealth grants.




01996-97

20

40

60

80

100

1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000

% o

f Sta

te t

ax r

even

ue r

aise

d

01996-97

20

40

60

80

100

1997-98 1998-99(a) 1999-2000(b)

% o

f fun

ding

rec

eive

d

n.a.

82.5 82.8 83.1

57.3 56.8 56.2 56.6


(C) The extent to which a more commercial

approach is being adopted by

government businesses.

The adoption of a more commercial

operational approach by government

businesses provides for the establishment of

economic activity on a sustainable economic

and financial basis and encourages those

businesses to add value to their operations.

Government businesses that moved to a more

commercial approach in 1999-2000 included

the Western Australian Treasury Corporation,

the Western Australian Land Authority

(Landcorp) and five port authorities. This

represents a movement from six out of 33 to

13 out of 40 government businesses that have

moved to operating on a more commercial

basis.

The percentage of government

businesses that have been corporatised,

commercialised or are subject to

accountability arrangements

The results represent the increasing approach

in implementing government policy for

government businesses to operate on a more

sustainable economic and financial basis.


01996-97

20

40

60

80

100

1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000

% o

f gov

ernm

ent

busi

ness

es

11.818.2 18.2

32.5


Efficiency Indicators (Audited)

The efficiency indicators have been designed

to measure the unit cost of our outputs –

policy advice, systems and implementation.

Unit cost measures including the allocation

between policy advice, systems, and

implementation, have been obtained from the

Treasury Output Management System.

For measurement purposes:

• policy advice is defined as recorded policy

advice provided to a minister or to

Cabinet (eg. Cabinet comments and

submissions, minutes of meetings and

ministerial correspondence). It is

measured as the average cost of providing

an item of policy advice;

• systems are defined as the provision of

broad systems and systems advice to

government and agencies (eg the budget

management system, capital planning

system, and the Government Finance

Statistics system) as well as systems

designed to provide better information

and advice and to manage services better.

It is measured as the average cost of

providing a system; and

• implementation is defined as services

provided to implement, and to enable

implementation of, government policies

(eg reports, presentations, consultancies,

and project management). It is measured

as the cost per report, presentation, or

hours of consultation or project

management.




Efficiency Measures 1998-99 1999-2000(a)

$ $

Policy AdviceCost per item of policy advice(b) 4,854 2,827SystemsCost per system(c) 490,876(d) 49,266ImplementationCost per report 7,170 2,201Cost per presentation to external clients/stakeholders 5,589 4,122Cost per hour of coordination and consultation 91 97Cost of project management (per hour) 817(e) 883

(a) State Fleet ($42,257,369) and property costs ($5,828,179) have been excluded from the efficiency measures for1999-2000 because they are not considered to be directly attributable to the production of outputs.

(b) We have identified three types of advice: strategic policy advice (advice on major issues); tactical policy advice(advice on complex matters); and routine policy advice (advice on day to day policy issues). The average cost ofproviding that break up of policy advice in 1999-2000 was as follows: strategic - $15,672; tactical - $5,104; androutine - $2,263 compared to 1998-99 of: strategic - $82,329; tactical - $23,711 and routine - $2,522.

(c) Treasury develops and maintains systems. The average cost of developing new systems in 1999-2000 was$59,532 and $47,126 to maintain compared to 1998-99 costs of $332,192 for new systems and $135,264 formaintained systems.

(d) This figure includes State Fleet costs of $5,416,391. For purposes of comparison to the 1999-2000 reportedfigure, the 1998-99 cost per system was $189,965.

(e) This figure includes property costs of $5,042,000. For purposes of comparison with the 1999-2000 reportedfigure the cost per hour for project management was $413.


47

Output Measures (Not Audited)

Treasury produces three outputs:

• policy advice to ministers and agencies on

economic and financial management

matters;

• systems and support to agencies for the

budget process and to help meet the

government’s accountability requirements;

and

• support, advice and guidance to agencies

to help implement the government’s

economic and financial management

initiatives.

Our performance with each of these outputs

in terms of quantity produced, quality,

timeliness and cost is outlined in this section.

Quality and timeliness measures were

obtained from the same client/stakeholder

survey as our effectiveness performance

measures. The quantity and cost of our

outputs were obtained from our internal

output management and financial

information systems.

Policy Advice

We provide policy advice to government to

enable it to acquire, allocate, and manage

resources for the sustainable provision of

public services as well as for development of

a strong, competitive economy.

Measure 1997-98(a) 1998-99 1999-2000Target Actual

QuantityUnits of strategic policy advice 32 23 29 26Units of tactical policy advice 219 104 175 183Units of routine policy advice 2,030 1,612 1,484 1,335QualityProportion of clients/stakeholders who believe

our advice is clear, concise, relevant, completeand identifies options and alternatives (per cent) na 66 70 66

TimelinessProportion of clients/stakeholders who believe

that our advice has been timely (per cent) na 50 60 63CostCost per unit of strategic policy advice($) 50,625 50,049 71,000 15,672Cost per unit of tactical policy advice($) 10,594 14,250 12,000 5,104Cost per unit of routine policy advice($) 1,493 1,516 2,000 2,263

(a) Approximate estimates only.na denotes not available



Systems

We also develop and introduce systems that

assist government in acquiring, allocating and

managing resources for sustainable provision

of public services as well as to encourage a

more competitive Western Australian

economy.

The only systems we have identified under

this output are those used primarily to

produce an external product (eg whole of

government reporting systems, budget

systems).





QuantityNumber of newly developed systems 23 5 7 4Number of maintained systems 46 12 18 21QualityProportion of clients/stakeholders who believe the

budget/reporting approach we developed waseffective/very effective in helping them to better judgethe government’s financial performance (per cent) na 64 70 63

TimelinessProportion of clients/stakeholders who consider we

were timely/very timely in helping them meet budget milestones and whole of government reporting (per cent) na 53 60 56

CostCost per newly developed system($) 56,652 43,702 33,000 59,532Cost per maintained system($) 26,739 79,263 85,000 47,126




Implementation

Our third output is the implementation of

arrangements and strategies to help

government to acquire, allocate and manage

resources for the sustainable provision of

public services as well as to promote a more

competitive Western Australian economy.

We help to implement the government’s

policies through reports we prepare,

presentations to clients, coordination and

consultation, as well as through project

management.


QuantityNumber of reports 478 442 597 833Number of presentations to external

clients/stakeholders 73 72 73 77Hours of coordination and consultation 66,000 73,376 100,000 103,152Hours of project management 14,000 12,476 14,000 5,694QualityProportion of clients/stakeholders who

believe our timeframes for implementingeconomic and financial management initiatives have been effective (per cent) na 86 90 71

TimelinessProportion of clients/stakeholders who

believe our timeframes for implementingfinancial management initiatives have been reasonable (per cent) na 53 60 66

Proportion of clients/stakeholders whoconsider we provided economicinformation within reasonable timelinesto assist their decision making (per cent) na 85 90 69

CostCost per report($) 3,703 4,312 5,000 2,201Cost per presentation to external

clients/stakeholders($) 2,877 3,361 6,000 4,122Cost per hour of coordination and

consultation($) 89 54 80 97Cost per hour of project management($) 124 258 300 883



Key Points

• Our financial results were affected by the

exclusion of the Government Projects

Office from Treasury from 1 July 1999.

This reduced our net assets by

$11.9 million in 1999-2000.

• The government owned buildings remain

in Treasury but we no longer receive the

net rentals from these buildings. The

operating statement includes $5.8 million

of expenses and revenues, consisting of

rentals received by the property managers

and paid by them in outgoings, but the

remaining net rentals are paid directly

into the Consolidated Fund.

• Our financial results also reflect a full year

of management of the government's State

Fleet operations, (resulting in the

inclusion of $39.3 million in operating

expenses and $40.9 million in operating

revenues).

Discussion and Analysis

Net Cost of Services

The net cost of services in 1999-2000

was $22,729 million, compared with

$25,881 million in the previous year

(after adding back in the net revenue from

government owned buildings for

consistency).

This effective reduction is due mainly to a

surplus on State Fleet operations in 1999-2000

of $1.6 million and costs in 1998-99 relating to

the Government Projects Office operations of

$3.9 million.

This was only partially offset by an increase

in property maintenance costs of $2.3 million.

Net Revenue from Restructuring

This is an expense in 1999-2000, and is

mainly assets and cash transferred to the

Government Projects Office at 1 July 1999.

Financial Position

Our total equity changed only marginally, the

reduction caused by the transfer of assets and

liabilities to the Government Projects Office

being offset by revaluation of the remaining

land and buildings we control.

The substantial increase in current liabilities

is due to an amount of $4.5 million payable to

the Government Projects Office not being

paid until July 2000.



Financial Summary

T r e a s u r y F i n a n c i a l R e s u l t s



Treasury administers a range of transactions

on behalf of government.

The expenditures include appropriation

payments to all government agencies,

community service obligations and equity

contributions paid to government trading

enterprises, various subsidies and grants to

both government and private sector agencies,

refunds, payments relating to superannuation

and interest and capital repayments on the

government's debt.

The receipts include mainly Commonwealth

grants to the State, payments to government

for tax equivalents, dividends, surpluses and

recoveries of loan expenses, superannuation

charges by government trading enterprises

and proceeds of asset sales.

Consolidated Fund appropriations to all

government agencies have been included for

the first time this year. The comparative

figures for 1998-99 have not been adjusted.

Administered payments increased by

$7,037 million over the previous year,

mainly due to inclusion of the appropriation

payments, an increase in payments under

Superannuation Acts and increased loan

repayments under Loan Acts.

Treasury Financial Highlights 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000$m $m $m $m $m

Net Cost of Services 17.5 18.1 18.8 15.7 22.7Operating expenses 17.6 18.5 20.6 37.7 69.5Operating revenues 0.1 1.1 2.1 22.0 46.8Revenues from government 20.8 19.2 21.0 22.2Net revenue from restructuring na na 75.8 1.6 (13.5)

Total Assets 2.5 5.7 95.6 113.7 118.7Current assets 0.3 3.5 2.8 14.8 15.6Non-current assets 2.2 2.2 92.8 98.9 103.1

Total Liabilities 2.8 3.3 3.6 9.1 14.1Current liabilities 1.8 2.4 2.5 8.0 13.1Non-current liabilities 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0

Equity (0.3) 2.3 92.0 104.6 104.6

nadenotes not applicable

T r e a s u r y A d m i n i s t e r e d I t e m s


Financial Summary



The Consolidated Fund Appropriations are as

published in the annual estimates. The

increase in payments under Superannuation

Acts is due to application of a fund surplus

from the previous year and general salaries

and wages growth. The increase in capital

repayments is due to special repayments

made at the end of the financial year.

The increase in revenues of $186 million

is substantially due to increased

Commonwealth grants.

Administered assets have reduced, due to

lower cash and investment balances at

30 June 2000 and a decline in recoverable

advances that have been repaid ahead of

schedule, partially offset by other revenues

receivable, which largely consist of tax

equivalents and inclusion of property under

finance lease.

The increase in administered liabilities of

$5,147.0 million is due mainly to the inclusion

in 1999-2000 of employers unfunded liability

under State Government superannuation

schemes of $5,354.0 million, liability under

finance lease for property of $17.4 million

and unfunded liability in the Government

Insurance Fund of $48.5 million. This is offset

by reductions in the trust fund liability and in

the liability under Loan Acts.

Treasury Administered Items 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00$m $m $m $m $m

Expenses 1,309.0 1,539.4 2,436.3 8,273.5 8,527.4

Revenues 2,860.9 3,020.9 4,766.2 4,097.4 4,283.3

Total Assets 2,106.4 1,768.1 1,757.2 1,981.6 1,618.2Current 1,168.8 1,184.5 1,285.1 1,872.5 1,574.1Non-Current 937.6 583.6 472.1 109.1 44.1

Total Liabilities 2,261.7 2,123.7 2,305.5 2,445.6 7,592.6Current 271.2 396.1 1,196.0 1,541.5 1,696.5Non-Current 1,990.5 1,727.6 1,109.5 904.1 5,896.1


treasury annual report 1999-2000 · treasury department anual report 1999-2000. the hon r.f. court,...

Documents