BROTHERHOOD

of Sf LAURENCE

Strategic Planning Think Tank 4 September 1998

Participants
Fred ArgyH
1
Terry Cutler
1
Morag Fraser
1
Linda Hancock
1
Betty Hounslow
1
Brim Howe
1
Mark Lyons
1
Fergus Ryan
1
Sheila Shaver
1
**notattending, will contribute in writing

Sandy Clark
Mike Feeney
Jim Minchin
Merle Mitchell

+Michael Challen
Paul Bird
Lesley Dredge
Alison McClelland

1
1
1
1

External advisers

BSL Board Members

Executive Director & Board Member

Director of Finance
Director of Community Services
Director of Social Action & Research

BSL 'Think Tnnk'for the Strntegic Plnn 1999-2002

The Brotherhood of St Laurence, 67 Brunswick Street, Fitzroy

In the Upper Millott meeting area (directions available from Reception on arrival)

Where?
.

Friday, 4 September from 2pm (1.45pm for 2pm) until 9pm

When?

Timetable:
2.00-2.15

Introduction of participants and the context of the day

2.15-5.45

3-minute presentations on specific areas with follow-up conversations

2.15-2.20

Presentation on Economics and TeclrnicalAdvnnces (Terry Cutler)

2.25-3.00
3.00-3.05

Follow-up response
Identification of key understandings for the BSL

3.05-3.20

Afternoon Tea

3.20-3.25

Presentation on Social and Cultural Aspects (Morag Fraser)

3.25-4.10
4.10-4.15
4.15-4.20
4.20-5.05
5.05-5.10

Follow-up response
Identification of key understanding for the BSL

Presentation on Political and Public Attitude Aspects (Brian Howe)

Follow-up response
Identification of key understandings for the BSL

5.10-5.45

Overview of the key understanding and any additional issues

How do we identify what is to be among the priorities for the BSL?

5.45-6.00
6.00-7.0

Pre-Dinner drinks
Dinner

7.00-8.30

A conversation about what the Brotherhood's response might be

Short observations about what is influencing the sector's capacity for

response and the nature of the sector's response (Mark Lyons, Betty
Hounslow)
7.15-8.15
8.15-8.30

8.30

Follow-up response
Identification of key understandings for the BSL

Summary, 'where to from here' and close

...

BROTHERHOOD
of S! LAURENCE
67 Brunswick Street, Fitzroy 3065 Victoria Australia
Telephone: (03) 9419 7055 Facsimile: (03) 9417 2691
DX 282 Melbourne

10th August 1998

Dr Terry Cutler
Cutler & Company
7 Leveson Street
NORTH MELBOURNE 3051
Dear Terry,
Re:

Brotherhood of St Laurence "Think Tank" for Strategic Plan 1999-2002

Friday, 4th Sepetmber 1998

First of all, thank you for accepting my invitation to assist the BSL with its strategic thinking by
participating in this "think tank" on the global, local, economic, social and political context we
have to operate in.
More specifically is to identify those opportunities, needs or issues that the BSL will need to
seize, respond to or contend with through its next three year strategic plan, 1999-2002.
The meeting is restricted to approximately 15 people with eight people or more from outside
the BSL, three from its Board together with the four members of its Executive Council. I attach
a list of participants.
The procedure will be for the participants as a whole to consider various sectors of our context.
The attached point to what some of those sectors might be. I would welcome your own
thoughts as to what elements ought to be considered. These can be faxed to me directly on (03)
9486 9724 by 24th August. The Executive Council needs to have the opportunity to be broken
out of its own presuppositions and perceptions.

By way of background, I also enclose key pages from our current ('96-'98) strategic plan.
With gratitude,
Yours sincerely,

The Right Reverend Michael Challen

Executive Director
Attach

BSL THINK TANK FOR STRATEGIC PLAN 1999-2002

The following is to indicate possible areas of human activity which might create
opportunities, raise needs, pose threats and thus require the BSL to change as it plans
strategies to advance the wellbeing of low income people through positive social change.
A.

B.

External to "Welfare" and the BSL

1.

Economics

international
Asia-Pacific
Australian

2.

Technological Advances
new possibilities
who benefits/who loses out

3.

Social/Cultural

views of "society"
quest for community
form of "welfare state"
dominant values
demographic changes
vulnerable groups

4.

Political

philosophical/policy orientation of governments

smaller/larger government

5.

Public(s)

regard for welfare

perception of BSL

Internal to "Welfare" and the BSL

1.

Prevalence of poverty
New trends/groups

2.

Changes in Public Policy

employment
social wage (housing, education, community services)
tax regime
social securit)i

3.

Welfare Sector

emergence of new peak (Church) bodies;

impact upon VCOSS, ACOSS
competition/co-operation between service deliverers
BSL relating to governments with respect to service
delivery and public policy
competition for community support and money
key opportunities/needs requiring new service
responses

VISION STATEMENT

The Brotherhood of St Laurence is a Christian organisation

committed to a just society through identifying with and being involved with
the poor and disadvantaged.

MISSION STATEMENT

We of the Brotherhood of St Laurence work for the well-being of the poorest members of the
Australian community to improve their economic, social and personal circumstances by:

+ offering friendship, support and advocacy;

+

sharing goods, services and resources;

+ contributing to their empowerment and to the prevention of

further poverty;

+ improving the structures, institutions and distribution of resources to

establish their security of income, shelter and employment; and

+ working towards achieving a sustainable Australian society

within the global community.

Page 1

INTRODUCTION

his Strategic Plan for the period 1996-1999 is to enable the Brotherhood of St Laurence
(BSL) to achieve specific objectives in the areas of community services, social action
and management which arise from its Christian foundation, values and vision.

During the next three years, the BSL expects:

unemployment to remain at an unacceptably high level;
that inequality and poverty will continue to be a substantial problem;
that governments at all levels, in withdrawing from direct community service delivery,
will be putting programs out to others through competitive tendering and promoting
different types of community service delivery models;
that fundraising will occur in a fiercely competitive environment; and
that the Australian economy will be increasingly effected by Australia's exposure to the
Asia-Pacific region;
During this period, the organisation aims to make truly operative throughout the organisation the
key recommendations of the Directions 2000 Review, namely,
3

the new management structure;

the application of the three frameworks, The Brotherhood's Operating Charter,

Guiding Principles for Service Involvement, and Decision Criteria for Service
Participation;
adequate reporting through the Strategic Management Framework;
the pursuit of positive social change through community services and social action
and with special measures to offset the entrenchment of poverty; and

securing the BSL's financial base.

The preparation of this Strategic Plan has been a matter of urgency so the involvement of all
BSL stakeholders was less than what would have occurred if more time had been available.
Nevertheless, the Strategic Plan has included consultation with BSL staff.
The Executive Council initially met to identify the Goals and Key Outcomes. These were then
referred to the Board and senior management for amendment and acceptance. Six Goals were
identified and the Plan illustrates our strategic approach for achieving these goals, which are
considered to be the key objectives for the next three years. Each Goal is supported by the Key
Outcomes we expect to achieve, the Slrategies we will undertake and the Performance
Indicators for measuring Goal achievement.

Page

Managers were asked to submit proposals which could be components of the strategies. Over
200 were received covering current operations, potential new projects, initiatives and issues
which were thought to be relevant for the next three years. These proposals will be further
considered by the Executive Council during the preparation of the annual plan in the context of
fit, merit and priority within the Strategic Plan. The annual planning process will give staff
opportunities to further contribute within the context set by the six Goals.
Decisions on priorities for potential new projects and initiatives will be made during the
preparation of the first annual plan. The availability of finances to fund such projects and
initiatives will be determined after a balanced operational budget for Year 1 has been achieved.
The financial performance achieved at the end of Year 1 will then shape the financial context in
which priorities for new projects and initiatives will be set for Year 2 and Year 3.
The Strategic Plan therefore is a template to be actively used by the Board, Executive Council
and management of the BSL over the next three years to achieve our organisation's Goals.

Page 3

STRATEGIC GOALS

- 1996-1999

The Executive Council considered the priorities of these goals and, whilst acknowledging that
they are all important, Goals I and 2 will have greater emphasis during 1996-1999.
Goal I is of primary importance as it is the reason for our existence. But without the achievement
of Goal 2 our capacity to exist is threatened.

By addressing and achieving Goals 3 6 we will be making a significant contribution to the

attainment of Goals l and 2.

GOAL 2 Ensuringfinancial stability

Page

GOAL 3

Improving management

GOAL 4

Strengthening strategic influence

GOAL 5

Achieving quality

GOAL 6

Enhancing relationships

BSL STRATEGIC PLAN 1996-1999 APPENDIX 1

THE BROTHERHOOD'S OPERATING CHARTER

Since its beginnings the Brotherhoodof St Laurence has been a dynamic institution, shifting focus in response
to changing needs within the community and as new opportunities have been identified.
Within the context of its Mission Statement, the Brotherhood adopts the following set of propositions as its
operating charter for going forward into the next century:
The Brotherhood is a Melbourne-basedorganisation that has a wider regional and national impact.
The Brotherhood's charter is to work with, and for, the wellbeing and empowerment of people who
are poor.
Drawing on its experience in directly providing services for some of the most neglected and needy
people in our community, the work of the BSL involves the advocacy of positive social change
based on policy and research.
The Brotherhood is a multi-service agency.
The Brotherhood is an organisation founded within the Anglican tradition that encourages the
involvement of all people supporting its mission.
The Brotherhood is an autonomous organisation, which is committed to continuing as an
independent voice for people in our community who are poor.
The capability of the Brotherhood centres around its people. The Brotherhood relies on professional
workers to provide the highest quality of performance, to support the greatest possible contribution
from volunteers, and to promote community self-help.
The Brotherhood's work relies upon the direct support of the community, as expressed through
donations, voluntary work, good will, and grants from governments and philanthropic twsts.
The Brotherhood is accountable to its Charter, its active supporters in the community, its staff and
voluntary workers and, above all, the people it seeks to serve.
The primary role of the Brotherhood's Board is to comply with its statutory obligations under its Act of
Incorporation and, as custodians of the Brotherhood's Charter and values, to:

*
*
*

establish the strategic directions of the organisation;

marshal the support of the community for the Brotherhood's work;
ensure good management, accountability, and financial viability;
* support and assist the management team in their task of building and renewing
capability; and
ensure effective management succession.

organisational

The primary role of the Brotherhood's management team is to provide leadership to the organisation
in both the articulation and implementation of its Charter through:

ensuring the Brotherhood's operations are managed within a strategic framework;

* marshalling the available resources of the Brotherhood for the greatest impact;

attracting, developing and inspiring paid staff and volunteers to achieve the highest standards of
service and of innovation; and
* ensuring accountability and responsibility in all areas of activity, including the achievement of
financial and budget targets.
As a champion for positive social change, the Brotherhood will itself change in response to wider
changes in the community and the emergence of new areas of need.

BSL STRATEGIC PLAN 1996-1999 APPENDIX 1

DECISION CRITERIA FOR SERVICE PARTICIPATION

There is a n identifiedn e e d
1.

'

People who are poor have a demonstrable need for certain services.

P r o g r a m m e s c a n b e designed t o p r o d u c e p o s i t i v e change
2.

There is a viable and productive strategy to address this need.

3.

The particular service creates direct opportunities for advocacy and social change.

4.

The particular service is consistent with the Brotherhood's overall policies and priorities.

There is a distinct case for the Brotherhood's involvement

5.

In providing services the Brotherhood will be able to produce positive outcomes for both individuals
and the community.

6.

There is scope to provide services that:

are developed in consultation with the people involved;

r will demonstrate new approaches;

respond to new and emerging trends in Australia's social environment;

underpin a wider impact through the advocacy of social justice.

* increase access to, and participation in, the community's services; and

7.

Other agencies are not as well placed to address the challenge and the Brotherhood can make a
distinctive contribution.

Represent t h e b e s t use o f the Brotherhood's l i m i t e d resources

8.

The specific programme complements or extends existing Brotherhood involvement in the area.
providing opportunities to secure scale efficiences.

9.

The programme adds to the overall effectiveness of the Brotherhood in pursuing its Mission, by
creating economies of scope (synergies).

10.

The programme builds upon the skills and the capabilities available to the Brotherhood.

11.

The programme does not expose the Brotherhood, without due consideration, to unfunded liabilities or
divert assets or resources from other priority projects.

12.

The programme can be implementedwithin the Brotherhood's core administrative structures.

Reliance on government funding must not impose undue constraints:

13.

There is scope for the Brotherhood to 'add value' over and above the terms of the service contract
with government.

14.

There is scope for the Brotherhood to 'top up' government funds to extend service initiatives.

15.

Government funded projects' are consistent with the Brotherhood's Mission and priorities, and can be
implemented within the Brotherhood's corporate planning parameters.

16.

Government funding will not constrain the Brotherhood's ability to exercise its public advocacy
functions.

BSL STRATEGIC PLAN 1996-1999 APPENDIX 1

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR SERVICE INVOLVEMENT

The Brotherhood's activities are founded on the principle of empowering the

people it seeks to serve.
The Brotherhood will support and assist local communities to develop
initiatives in new areas through empowering and seeding new ventures, but
will try to avoid permanent colonisation.
The Brotherhood will give priority to the needs of people who are poor,
particularly in areas that are not being addressed by other agencies, or new
and emerging areas of need in the community.
The Brotherhood will give priority to areas where synergies between advocacy
and services for target groups can be developed.
The Brotherhood seeks to ensure diversity of funding in order to secure its
independence.
The Brotherhoodwill only do that which it can do well, and where it can have a
'wider impact and strategic influence.
The Brotherhood does not aspire to be simply the biggest service provider in
any particular area of activity.

Dr Terry Cutler
Cutler & Company
7 Leveson Street
NORTH MELBOURNE 3051
Fax: 9329 9939
Tel: 9329 8411

Response! yes,

Mr Fred Argy
16 Rossell Place
FLYNN ACT 2615
Fax: 062599010
Tel: 062585540

Response: very interested but would prefer

to make a contribution in writing rather than
fly down from Canberra. +XIBC to ring.

ill attend

d.

..~

Professor Brian Howe

The Centre for Public Policy
The University of Melbourne
234 Queensbury Street
CARLTON 3053
Fax: 9349 4442
Tel: 9349 4-442

Home: 6 Brennand Street

FITZROY NORTH 3068

434L-

v/.

5,463

Professor Brian Gallagher

Department of Political Science
The University of Melbourne
PARKVILLE 3052
By Facsimile: 9344 7906
Tel: 9344 9474

&G

MS Betty Hounslow
Director
Australian Council of Social Service
Level 2
619 Elizabeth Street
REDFERN NSW 2012
By Facsimile: (02) 9310 4822
Tel: (02) 9310 4844, ext.212

7
<+,..

- d-

?&S%&

Dr Meredith Edwards
UNIVERSITY OF CANBERRA ACT 2601
By Facsimile: (02) 6201 5384
Tel: (02) 6201 5111

(02.)6 ~ 0 S1o b /

&J-4>
'

ke-,

A0

--

*~~-13d
>US

bd(od

Mr John Clarke
Gore Street
FITZROY 3065
By Facsimile: 9417 5325
Tek94160524

Very interested but thinks it may

clash with production schedule. Will
check and advise. May be able to fit
in with production.

Professor Ruth Fincher

Department of Architecture, Building & Planning
The University of Melbourne
PARKVILLE 3052
By Facsimile: 9344 5532
Tek93445449

Mr Hugh Mackay
C/- The Age
250 Spencer Street
MELBOURNE 3000
By Facsimile: 9601 2327
Tel: 9600 4211
MS Belinda Probert
Centre for Applied Social Research
RMIT
Room 7, Level 4, Building 22
124 La Trobe Street
MELBOURNE 3000
By Facsimile: 9925 1087
Tel: 9925 3292
Prof Peter Saunclers
Director
Social Policy & Research Centre
University of New South Wales
3rd Floor Samuels Building
SYDNEY NSW 2052
By Facsimile: (02) 9385 1049
Tel: (02) 9385 3833

-1

'+

sf4.4

-3

+-

42.

coy-+9
or .i7g<-

c,

fb

3273

h~-qv--

&
\
S

( r L&-

(dc

J.JJpi--w
(-A
(oh-

)-.-'-P L&

F"""'

~d~..-cucQ,

9
Mr Fergus Ryan
Arthur Andersen
The Tower at Melbourne Central
360 Elizabeth Street
MELBOURNE 3000
By Facsimile: 9286 8100
Tel: 9286 8000

ys

Mr Chris ~ i ~ ~ h ,
The Collins Hill
Level 7
412 Collins Street
MELBOURNE 3000
By Facsimile: 9670 6326
Tel: 9670 0455

MS Heather Carmody
World Competitive
Level 7
21 Victoria Street
MELBOURNE 3000
By Facsimile: 9663 2525
Tel: 9663 2944

Unavailable as on leave 30/8 to 9/9 but very

interested and would be happy to assist at
any other time

*C

L -&-LAQ

SUITE 20 THELINDFIELD
CENTRE
12 TRYON ROAD LINDFIELD
NSW 2070
TELEPHONE
(02) 9416 4499 FACSIMILE(02) 9416 3150

29 July 1998

The Right Reverend Michael Challen

Executive Director
Brotherhood of St Laurence
67 Brunswick Street
FITZROY VIC 3065

Dear Bishop Challen,

Thank you for your letter of 13July, inviting me to join you and others in a forum
designed to provide input to the development of the Brotherhood of St Laurence
strategic plan for 1999-2002.
My secretary has already advised Carole Ainio that I am unfortunately unable to be
in Melbourne on Friday 4 September, because of existing commitments which will
keep me in Sydney at that time.
However, I wanted to respond personally to your letter, to express my regret at
being unable to join you on that day, but also to assure you that I would be pleased
to offer whatever help I can, at some other time, if a suitable opportunity arises.
In the meantime, may I offer you my best wishes for the success of your September
forum.

Yours sincerely,

&y
Hug Mackay

POSTALADDRESS: PO BOX 270 LINDFIELDNSW

2070
MACKAY&SEARCH PTY LIMITEDA.C.N. 032 591 933

BROTHERHOOD
of S! LAURENCE
67 Brunswick Street, Fitzroy 3065 Victoria Australia
Telephone: (03) 9419 7055 Facsimile: (03) 941 7 2691
DX 282 Melbourne

29th July 1998

Mr Fred Argy
16 Rossell Place
FLYNN ACT 2615

By Facsimile: 02 62599010
Dear Fred,

Thank you for responding to my invitation to participate in our strategic thinking on 4th
September next.
I appreciate your response and the difficulties you might have in making it. Of course we
would welcome any contribution you could make by responding to some questions. At the
moment they have not been determined collectively but there are three questions which I
would like to put to you:
1.

In what way has Australia got the freedom to determine its own economy and
therefore both its social and economic goals; what contribution can Australia make
in the setting of social and economic goals for other nations?

2.

In what areas do you see employment growth; what types of new jobs will emerge;
will such jobs be available for people of less education and social confidence?

3.

To what degree does the generation of new jobs require a lowering of wages?
Indeed, will the lowering of wages lead to an increase in employment? If so, will
such wages need to be topped up and how can this be done through the Social
Security system without such people being stigmatised?

Another question which you might consider with me is if governments want to deal with
fewer but larger welfare organisations, what does this mean for the Brotherhood of St
Laurence. Does it necessarily mean that it shouuld become larger or can it maintain its
independent and critical thinking while within a consortium?
Looking forward to seeing you on the 13th August.

P S &#&
. L-

k,&

+F -

With good wishes,

,I

Yours sincerely,

.z?G

y e
T

4," .

*.:

g"

The Right Reverend Michael Challen

Executive Director

16 Rossell Place, Flynn

Flynn, ACT 2615
Phone 62585540
Fax 625990 10

The Right Reverend Michael Challen

Executive Director
Brotherhood of St. Laurence
Dear Michael,
Thank you for your letter of 29 July seeking my views on a number of questions. They all
need careful thought and I can only give you a top of the head reaction for the'present.
The first question is crucial. We are being brain washed into thinking that because financial
markets dislike fiscal deficits, high wages, business regulations, generous social support
systems and high taxes, we are helpless to do anything about these things.
It is certainly true that governments are subject to more policy constraints than they were back
in the 1960's. Given the increasing mobility of capital and skilled/professional people, and
given the obsession of financial markets with small government, there is a higher "price" to
pay for redistribution policies. But that does not mean we have lost our national autonomy on
social issues. The following points are relevant.
First, the "price" we pay for increased compassion is not exorbitant. If for example we had
tomorrow a government which chose to raise taxes to finance wider social and labour market
programs'or which decided to run down the surplus to do so, we might find that markets
demand a higher "country risk loading. But on all the evidence, after the initial dust settles,
the premium industry would have to pay on its capital costs would be very small - of the order
of 114 of 1 per cent. And there are offsetting economic benefits f%omhaving a fairer and more
equal society (which I develop in my Sambell Oration and in my book) - not to mention the
broader benefits for social harmony and cohesion. I find no empirical evidence that
consensual countries systematically perform worse economically.
Secondly, globalization of capital markets has reinforced the importance of choosing
redistribution instruments which are market neutral and transparent e.g. do it less through
business regulation and more through the use of the social transfer system; and more through
base broadening tax measures which reduce tax avoidance or taxes on immobile capital like
land, and less through increases in corporate tax or marginal tax rates.
Thirdly, national governments should work together to develop international rules which
prevent "social dumping". One suggestion I make in my book is an extension of the European
Social Charter, and I notice Robert Kuttner in today's AFR argues for something similar on
the basis that "a higher international floor for national social standards would defend them
against market pressures to dismantle them".

On the second question you ask, I do not have adequate expertise. Some believe that the
increasing relative demand of skilled relative to unskilled workers may come to an end soon
(Peter Dawkins, Melbourne Uni) and the position of unskilled workers will improve. Bit I
would not bet on it. I think governments will have to address the problem of surplus unskilled
workers by a mixture of retrainin and by the creation of suitable jobs for them. I argue this in
my book pages 147-157.

&L*/Ek,*&

As to the third question, I argue against wage deregulation in my Sambell Oration. And my
book develops this argument on pages 94 ff
The fourth question you ask - about the future of welfare organizations - is I'm afraid beyond
me..
I am happy to pursue this correspondence hrther with you if you wish
Yours sincerely,

Fred Argy

SEW BY:

Fred Argy
Fnu 02 6259 9010

Ms. Aison McClelland

Brothemodd of St. Laurence
Fwc03 9417 2691

"I.

For putposes ofyour strategic meeting of 4 September, you asked me to think about the
socio-economic challenges likely to c o ~ o nAustralian
t
policy in the years ahead and the
social and economic research which needs to be done to help the Brotherhood meet these
challenges.IIlrave tried to put togaba some top ofthe head ideas belowOne ofthe big issues will he the one already identified by Bishop Challen in his letter to me
of29 July viz. the dearee ofd i r y fmeJom avaiLr6le to A d ~ ~ v a U m ~ m r n ein a
Is

ghbufiu:dor QI k a \ ~ i n t e r ~ ~ t i o n ~ ~1 gave
e d eBishop
~ y . ~ h i l e an first response to the
quesiion in my letter of6 A u m . I suggested that the ?tustaiacd economic costs of adopting
policies which are not "market friendly"(e.g. ~~itCb'kI6
to small iiscal deficits, higher
taxation a d incrrased goyernment spending and resisting h t h a d o n to deragulate tbe
labour market) are nnt as o
v
8s is often allegcd

But my commentswere b d on casual observation of the international evidence and

Australia's own historical e x p a h c e and were very judgmentalin character.Clearly #hereis a
need fir a comprehensive review of hliterature (which is now extensive) to assess the
8conornic costs of adopting social policies viewed as unfriendly by international financial
markets.I would give this high p r i i t y in your -=h
p r o m But beware of these endless
1MF and OECD reports all designed to promote globalism rather than &ate
governments
on how best to adapt to it.

The second big challenge of the next decade will beW

.Y
.dparate o ~ p i w nplw f h .
Here I stand by the themes of my book i.e. governments shautd stop pmmg themselves in
ideological st~@htjaEk&pon the role ofgovernment intervention. I see a need for

a Iess Iaissez faire appmach on short-term demand and incomes mmatpmmt

more flexibility in sating medium-termurg&s such as an m a m a 1 fiscal swpluses wd
small wmmnh
more active government involvement in promotinx a better regional spread of
employment opportunities and most of all
a much bigger government inv-nt
in human capital and adive labour market
pragams.

This type of agenda is anathema to many economistsbut offen on ideological grounds. It

needs critical scnrtizty by an objective academic.

SOT BY:

A third issue of importance is ihe amg of'/kpq&Iiun d i n ~ , q c n e r a t i mel p i q . 1

believe these problems have been deliberately hyped up for ideological reasons and I can
summarize my main arguments for you if Bishop Ch&m wants.

A fourth.area br research isthe distrihticd impact o~vcai17use~nnnmice#~rrns.On some

such as reduced protection, wage deregulzdon and tax reform we have an extensive liternture
to draw on . On others such as the distributional e m s ofprivatization and competition
policies the iieratux is mare spars, Some research needs commissioning but most of the
work would consist of symthesizing the existing literature.
Yet anutha area which seems to me to tequire W e r work althwgb 1 am sure you know
more abut it thon I do, islaow ,gvwnmwdlucan be assisted &J &$M souid totgets in the
same way they define aonomic targets such as GDP growth, external b a l m fiscal surplus
etc.

The above would point to the desired levels ofredistrrMon. But a sixth area which needs a
lot of W n g is on the apf1maImth~&or h-mmtenh-ufre&lrihrion Which ones acbieve
their social objective best at least economic cost? You and I b e speculated on this question
but a really rigorous a w k m it wwld be good.
I hope these rushed thoughts are h l p l l for the meeting. I would be glad tn contribute on
ofthese issues above subject to time and my physical condition. But many see me as old
Etchiond. I suspect you wwld get mom up to date advice Born younger ecommists such as

Wssin.

Pred Argy