Page 1453 - Week 05 - Thursday, 12 May 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I warn the Chief Minister and the Government that the Liberal Party, even before the committee was invited to look at the Bill, had determined that it would not support it. It still will not. With the potential support of the Independents, the Government may lose the Bill anyway if they are not prepared to listen to reasonable and sensible advice. I will be interested to hear the Chief Minister's rebuttal of my arguments. I am happy to allow her the courtesy of a reply, even though the standing orders do not require it. On what basis has the Government rejected what I believe to be very substantial expert advice on this matter?
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (10.50), by leave: I would like to respond fairly briefly to the issues that Mr Kaine has raised. At the outset I want to put to rest the inference that Mr Kaine has made that the Government in some way undervalues the work of the Public Accounts Committee. That most certainly is not the case. I have welcomed report after report from the Public Accounts Committee, and I have responded in full to the recommendations of those reports. In this case I note that the response that I made was fairly lengthy and fairly detailed. I responded to each of the Public Accounts Committee's recommendations. I greatly value the work of that committee. As a former presiding member, I recognise the worth of the scrutiny that occurs in that committee. I do take their work very seriously. I always have, and I always will.
On this particular matter, however, it is clear to me that there is an irreconcilable difference of opinion between the Public Accounts Committee and the Government. Mr Kaine has accused me of ignoring the Public Accounts Committee's views. I have not. It must be obvious to all members that I have not proceeded with the Bill. What greater response could you have to the recommendations of the Public Accounts Committee? I do not intend to proceed with the Bill. Given that state of affairs, I think that Mr Kaine should be well satisfied.
I would like to say that when I introduced this Bill it was, as Mr Kaine says, in order to enable the Territory's investments to be protected through the use of derivatives. I regard derivative transactions, in the way that they lock in a future sale price to protect against possible price falls, as a form of insurance for the Territory's investments. It is a form of insurance in the financial market against the possibility of very significant and uncertain changes in prices. I resent enormously Mr Kaine's assertion that I and my Treasury officers are involved, to quote him, in some sort of gambling game. We are not. That is, I think, an unworthy assertion for Mr Kaine to make. In common with all members of this Assembly, the Government will not allow and will not condone speculation, and neither will Treasury officers. I am sure that we can all agree that to speculate with public funds in the way that Mr Kaine has implied would be extremely poor management, irresponsible management. It does not happen, and it will not happen. Members may be aware that the Audit Act already requires that the use of derivatives must relate to pre-existing borrowing or investments.
Turning to another matter on which the PAC made a recommendation, Madam Speaker, I would like to mention that the proposed contracts for individual external funds managers were to add a further layer of control; not, as Mr Kaine says, to indulge in some gambling game, but to add further control. The Public Accounts Committee, I believe, was fully briefed on the structure and the content of these contracts.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .