Department of the Environment

About us | Contact us | Publications

About us header images - leftAbout us header images - centreAbout us header images - right

Publications archive

Disclaimer

Key departmental publications, e.g. annual reports, budget papers and program guidelines are available in our online archive.

Much of the material listed on these archived web pages has been superseded, or served a particular purpose at a particular time. It may contain references to activities or policies that have no current application. Many archived documents may link to web pages that have moved or no longer exist, or may refer to other documents that are no longer available.

Independent review of the Australian Greenhouse Office

Hon. Warwick L. Smith LLB, June 2002

5. Stakeholder views on the AGO

As part of this independent review, the views of key AGO stakeholders were sought. A range of Commonwealth and State/Territory government ministers and agencies, research institutions, industry organisations, companies, environmental organisations and other interested parties were contacted and asked to provide submissions addressing the terms of reference of the review. Thirty-two written submissions were received; discussions were also held with a number of individuals (see Appendix D).

A summary of the main points that were raised by stakeholders are given below. A more detailed summary is at Appendix E. These include supportive comments, suggestions for change and areas where some stakeholders felt improvements could be made. These issues are further discussed in the following section.

The AGO also recently (late 2001) commissioned Orima Research to conduct an independent review of stakeholder views on priorities strategies for the Office over the next three years. This exercise was aimed at gathering input to inform the development of the AGO's 2002-04 Corporate Plan. The study collected stakeholders views on priority issues, as well as future approaches they thought the AGO should focus on (based on those currently in its corporate plan).

The options presented in this survey largely focussed on the 'what' of the AGO's activities, which are more relevant to the scope component of the terms of reference of this review. While the survey did ask about preferred approaches, the questions were posed at such a broad level that they provide little information that relates to the Office's efficiency and effectiveness - the other main component of this review. The survey also provides some interesting observations from stakeholders on the level and quality of their communication with the AGO.

Not surprisingly, this exercise also raised the need for effective consultation processes and an inclusive approach to policy development. The survey also showed the diverse opinions of different stakeholder groups, with different views on the highest priority strategies and best means to achieve outcomes. This diversity of viewpoints was also apparent in the representations made to this review.