Introduction by Croakey: A recent audit of the Measuring What Matters Framework has found it did not have arrangements in place to assess if the framework was meeting its policy objective – to track Australia’s progress “towards a more healthy, secure, sustainable, cohesive and prosperous Australia”.
Chelsea Hunnisett, a Laureate PhD Candidate and Government Relations Specialist in the Planetary Health Equity Hothouse at The Australian National University, writes below this is a “significant gap when it comes to developing a framework that is designed to have tangible wellbeing impacts for current and future generations”.
The Australian National Audit Office, which undertook the audit, made two recommendations to the Department of Treasury and Finance to improve monitoring and evaluation of how the Framework is being embedded across government, and arrangements for delivering and publishing the next Measuring What Matters statement.
Hunnisett argues the re-election of the Albanese Labor Government offers an important opportunity for the Government and Treasurer Dr Jim Chalmers to make ambitious economic changes “that will lift people out of poverty, enhance environmental protections and address the social immobility being driven by a consumptogenic system“.
Chelsea Hunnisett writes:
A little over a year ago, this author wrote an op-ed pondering the status of a wellbeing economy in Australia. I wondered what had happened to Measuring What Matters, the much needed first step to get Australians a fairer, more transparent economic system, and whether the break from conservative politics could mean better climate, health and equity outcomes for current and future generations.
A year on, one landslide Commonwealth election and two budgets later, we sadly remain largely where we were.
Other than some bureaucratic re-shuffling of the governance of Measuring What Matters within Commonwealth Treasury itself, there hasn’t been a lot that’s changed about Measuring What Matters.
More significantly, there has been little, if anything, from Treasurer Dr Jim Chalmers on the promise of a wellbeing economy for Australia or leadership on significant economic reform.
Auditor’s findings
The Australian National Auditors Office (ANAO) has recently taken an interest in Measuring What Matters too. Just last month, a report was released on the effectiveness of the design and implementation of Measuring What Matters.
The basis of the audit was the Government’s claim that Measuring What Matters is “an important foundation on which we can build — to understand, measure and improve on the things that matter to Australians”.
The report from ANAO found that while “the design and implementation of the Measuring What Matters framework was largely effective”, it “did not have arrangements in place to assess if Measuring What Matters was meeting its policy objective”.
This we knew – and has been the focus of much attention from civil society on advancing Measuring What Matters objectives.
The ANAO report cited the Measuring What Matters Statement and Dashboards as “examples of mechanisms that report on and monitor progress of indicators and metrics underlying the Measuring What Matters framework”; however, it did not find examples of reporting on the mechanisms in terms of improvements in wellbeing.
That’s a pretty significant gap when it comes to developing a framework that is designed to have tangible wellbeing impacts for current and future generations.
The ANAO also found that while the design and development of Measuring What Matters was ‘largely effective’, it did not “document the rationale for how themes and indicators were selected based on the consultation feedback”.
This is an important finding as it speaks to a lack of clarity about how consultation findings have been used to date, and what the next stages might be in community consultation.
It also raises concerns about moving beyond metrics already accounted for across the Government, into new ones of contextual relevance to Australia that need to be developed. For example, the inclusion of First Nations Peoples’ understandings of wellbeing.
What’s next
Of most interest to me in the ANAO findings is that there are no governance structures in place to commence the development of the next Measuring What Matters Statement.
No doubt the election, coupled with waning political enthusiasm for Measuring What Matters or a wellbeing economy, has driven this delay.
However, those structures are crucial to the next stage of development and accountability for Measuring What Matters, and require active political engagement and resourcing to commence.
The ANAO did make two key recommendations in its report:
- Monitoring and evaluation of how Measuring What Matters is being embedded across government
- Formulation of arrangements for delivering and publishing the next Measuring What Matters statement (due in 2026).
These recommendations were agreed by the Treasury, as noted in the ANAO report; however, it remains unclear how Treasury will address them, and when. That is to say, we are where we always were.
Leadership comes from the top
While in Opposition, Treasurer Chalmers spoke of the importance of reimagining the purpose of the economy. He knew that to get things right in the long term for climate, health and equity, a reimagining of the value and weight placed on metrics like Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is required.
So, why aren’t we closer to a wellbeing economy?
Perhaps it was the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic shockwaves in Australia and around the world. Perhaps it’s the rise of Trumpism or the renegotiation of geopolitical ties with Asia and Europe a la AUKUS.
Whatever the cause, the facts remain the facts. Australia is facing significant intergenerational challenges, and it is those with the least who feel it the most. This problem is deep rooted in our government, in our political class and in our economic system – and it will take ambitious reform throughout the whole of society to get it done.
Importantly, those who benefit from the status quo won’t give up their vested interest without a fight.
That’s why this year’s election result is so important.
Treasurer Chalmers could use the biggest electoral mandate in Australian history to get ambitious on a wellbeing economy, to use Measuring What Matters as the basis for economic change that will lift people out of poverty, enhance environmental protections and address the social immobility being driven by a consumptogenic system.
Australia could channel the challenges of the last five years and hold a national conversation with the Australian public to understand exactly what wellbeing means to them, and how to get there.
While the on-again, off-again Coalition lick their wounds and redefine their collective identity – including wondering if they want to address climate change or not *wince* – the ALP could look towards the wellbeing of future generations and use their majority to redefine the national identity.
Wellbeing economies around the world
Granted, change is not easy and this kind of change takes time. The good news is, other governments have done it.
I recently travelled to Iceland for this year’s global Wellbeing Economy Forum, and heard first hand from Wellbeing Economy Governments (WEGo) including Scotland, Wales, Finland and Iceland, on how they are shifting from a focus on GDP to a focus on wellbeing, and embedding those principles into their economic and social policy to improve climate, health and equity outcomes.
From the outside, it seems there is no better time than now to rethink and engage with Australians on our economic systems and whom they serve.
Given the ongoing pressures of cost-of-living domestically and the geopolitical upheaval caused by President Trump’s re-election and subsequent economic policies, the economic system that perpetuates growth at all costs continues to reveal itself as deeply flawed.
As I say, either way, the facts remain the facts. Climate change is worsening and inequities of class hold fast in Australian society.
Perhaps it’s idealistic, but the promise of Measuring What Matters and the wellbeing economy holds as true today as it did the day Treasurer Chalmers spoke to it in 2020 – if only our political leaders would grasp it.
The Department responds
A spokesperson for the Department of Treasury and Finance provided the following comments in response to questions from Croakey.
Q: How will Treasury monitor and evaluate how the Measuring What Matters framework is embedded across government, as per the recommendation made by Australian National Audit Office?
A: As noted in the response to the Audit Report, Treasury will establish arrangements for monitoring and evaluating progress toward achieving its intended outcomes. Implementation of these recommendations will be monitored by our Audit and Risk Committee.
Q: Who in Treasury, will be responsible for governance of the framework and delivering and publishing the next Measuring What Matters statement, as per the second recommendation made by the ANAO?
A: Measuring What Matters sits within the Australian Centre for Evaluation which is in Macroeconomic Analysis and Policy Division in Macroeconomic Group.
Q: Will the Treasury and Government increase efforts on activities under the Measuring What Matters framework? If so, how?
A; Every three years the Government will release a comprehensive Measuring What Matters statement examining trends in wellbeing, how we are tracking over time, where we’re doing well and where we need to do better. These insights will be used to inform budgets and government decision‑making to deliver better outcomes for Australians.
The Government is boosting funding too so that the ABS can deliver more frequent data. Reporting of annual progress against the framework has transferred from Treasury to the ABS, embedding the wellbeing framework alongside other critical indicators like GDP, employment and wages.
The Government is investing $14.8 million to expand and enhance the General Social Survey run by the ABS to paint a bigger, more detailed and vibrant picture of Australians’ wellbeing.
Q: How is Treasury engaging with other Departments to advance Measuring What Matters objectives?
A: Treasury engages with other Departments using an interdepartmental committee.
See Croakey’s archive of articles on health in all policies
