I would like to congratulate the winners of the SAGE submission awards, who were announced yesterday.
The SAGE Commission has said that they received ‘well over 400 submissions’ and chose the winning submissions after evaluating them for “the degree to which expenses might be reduced”.
Unfortunately however, while initially making the winning submissions available for public review, several hours later they removed them, and, after being questioned about why they removed them, made the following statement on their Facebook page:
Before they went down, however, I was able to download and save them all, and I present them below.
I haven’t changed any of the documents, other than converting the word documents (all but one were in word document formats) to pdf’s as these are both easier for me to post online, and easier to review.
As such, any typos, formatting errors, etc, are as they appear in the originals.
As these submissions were awarded on the basis of the format, presentation and (in light of the above explanation for taking them down) the figures in them, I think it’s important that the public be able to see them in their original sense, to understand the basis on what they were awarded.
The Winning Entries
There were awarded in five categories:
Best member of the public – Jennifer Ebbin ($2,500)
An employee of the government – Andrea Franklin ($2,500)
A young person between the ages of 18 and 25 – Connor Burns ($2,500)
A youth under the age of 18 – Ryan Robinson-Perinchief ($2,500)
Best overall submission from a member of the public or employee of the government – Magnus Henagulph ($12,500)
Now, I’m a bit confused about the big award; I had originally read the award scheme as saying that award would be $10,000, but they seem to have since changed that…
A People’s SAGE?
Now, to be clear, I did enter a submission, and I was hopeful I’d win either the ‘best member of the public’ or ‘best overall’ award, but I didn’t, and I congratulate the winners.
However, I thought it would be nice if people can see as many of the other entries as possible also.
Even though they didn’t win, I think they would be useful for stimulating a wider debate on possible ways to save money, increase efficiencies or generate revenue.
To that end, I am making my full submission available, and I’m asking that if anyone who submitted to SAGE is interested, send me their submission and I will make them available online, to allow for a ‘people’s SAGE’ process.
The only other submission that I believe is publicly available is from David Petty.