Page 2028 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 25 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We have been advised, as Mr Stevenson has been advised, I understand, that it is not possible - in fact, Mr Stevenson has a letter from the drafting office saying that it is not possible - to draft for Mr Stevenson an amendment to the LA(MS) Bill that would enable consultants to be employed by members. It has something to do, so we are told, with increasing the Government's budget and that would turn it into a money Bill. That is an interesting idea, and we have yet to establish that quite clearly, but that does not mean to say that they should not draft it. That is one of the reasons the Government is going to indicate to the drafting office why they cannot do that sort of business for us - that we should not be able to employ a firm of solicitors experienced in this particular role to do that job for us.
On that basis the Rally asked for and supported this concept in the past. We will continue to support the proposal because we believe that it is most necessary for all members in this Assembly to be able to do their job effectively. We are but 17. We have a major responsibility to the people of Canberra to make sure that the very best legislation is prepared and the very best service is given to the people of the ACT.
We are not asking for any more or less than the Government is entitled to. We are not asking for any more money. We are requesting to be able to do that in accordance with the staffing allocation that is provided to each member and group within the Assembly. We are asking for nothing more, nothing less. We do not want any more money spent. We want to do it within our allocation.
Therefore, we cannot understand why the Government refuses to support what we consider to be a most reasonable request. We will listen with great interest to the arguments that we expect to be put forward by the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister in this particular matter. I reiterate that the Rally moves this amendment to ensure that there is no doubt and no argument as to the terms and conditions of employment of consultants by members of this Assembly for all people within the Assembly.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (10.51): I will be quite brief. The Liberal Party will not support this motion, for some very simple reasons. Mr Jensen has spoken eloquently, but most of what he said is totally irrelevant to the argument. The fact is that there is a motion on the books passed by this Assembly only a matter of weeks ago that allows to be done what Mr Stevenson is now seeking to be done. We do not need a second motion to achieve it. All that is required is for you to determine how consultants can be paid from the money that you have.
I know that simply requires that you go back to the Chief Minister, from whom the original allocation was made, and she can determine that some of the salary vote that you
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .