How to deliver a 'world class' public service

EARC was supported by a competent but small staff. Some were seconded from the public service and supplemented by consultants and academics. EARC was not meant to be a permanent body, but was to review a wide range of areas, report and then disband.

EARC was a unique Australian body. As Tom Sherman (Sherman 1990: 3) noted at the time:

I can think of no other body, certainly in a Westminster system, which has such a wide-ranging mandate to inquire into parliament, electoral system, local government, and public administration.

Sherman's assessment still holds true today.

What did EARC do?

In essence EARC's brief was to review the:

• Legislative Assembly's electoral system
• operation of the Parliament
• public administration of the state
• local authority electoral system
• local authority administration

In terms of process EARC sought to "apply the highest standard of good public administration …its reports must be of the highest quality. Its operational, personnel and management practices must have high integrity" (Sherman: 3). EARC developed a clear agenda of projects, employed open processes involving extensive public consultation, workshops, and developed draft and then final reports with clear recommendations. Its operations were overseen by the Parliamentary EARC Committee which generally operated on bipartisan lines.

As the National Party Government that established EARC fell from office in December 1989, all of EARC's reports were made to the new Goss Labor Government.

In just over two years EARC produced:

• 21 issues papers
• 23 reports including full state and local government redistributions
• received 5,000 public submissions
• held 13 public seminars
• held hearings throughout the state
• drafted new bills and subordinate legislation
• presented state and local government electoral redistributions

The issue papers covered these topics: freedom of information laws; public sector auditing; parliamentary committees; review of administrative decisions; codes of conduct; government media units; pecuniary interest registers; donation laws; whistleblowers; electoral systems; political donations, reviews of auditing; reviews of parliamentary committees; media units in government; Attorney General independence (see EARC 1993 for full list).

EARC's reports reflected open public processes and were noted for not just their high quality, but also their practical recommendations. It has been assessed that 80 per cent of EARC's recommendations were accepted and implemented while many others were only slightly modified. New legislation flowed. As Professor Ken Wiltshire (1992: 265) wrote, "EARC has been a model organisation in terms of administrative reform". It was efficient, inexpensive, and its reports a benchmark in practicality and quality.