Page 2170 - Week 07 - Thursday, 16 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
and responsive and that staff should be well trained. I said that the structures and procedures of our public service should allow it to operate efficiently and effectively. I said that there would be full reciprocal mobility with the Australian Public Service. In the Public Sector Management Bills that are before the Assembly the Government has delivered on each and every one of our commitments for the new ACT service.
Contrary to Mrs Carnell's vision for the ACT public service - more of a nightmare than a vision, in my opinion - which if taken to its conclusion is tantamount to no public service at all, the Government has a positive and long-term vision. We have never wavered from our commitment. The type of public service that we want is one which is excellent in the advice and the service that it provides to our community and to the Government.
In June 1993 Mr De Domenico moved in this Assembly to establish the Select Committee on the Establishment of an ACT Public Service. The Government made substantial submissions to that committee. I appeared before the committee myself, as did senior officers of my portfolio. I have to admit, Madam Speaker, to being disappointed at the product of that committee's work. Considering that the committee has had since last August to consider the Government's major submission on the separate service, I believe that they left their run very late indeed, especially as we have kept the committee informed on the Bill's development. We provided the chair with a copy early this year. The committee has had the final Bill for two months. Mr Kaine, in fact, is on the public record as praising the public servants who had developed it. Of course, as we see from the committee's report, the committee now wants more time.
The fact of the matter, Madam Speaker, is that establishing a separate service is hard. It requires a fundamental understanding of what is a proper relationship between politicians and public servants in a parliamentary democracy. You really need to understand how a public service, in all of its complexity, actually works. You need to understand why public servants work for the ACT rather than for the Commonwealth and, most importantly, you need a positive and long-term vision. In my view, Mr Kaine, Mrs Carnell and Mr De Domenico have not shown that they have the understanding or the vision that is required for that task.
Madam Speaker, the ACT Public Sector Management Bill is a sound piece of legislation. It is very similar to, but not entirely the same as, the Commonwealth Public Service Act. For that reason, of course, it is bound to attract criticism. The Commonwealth Public Service Act, however, Madam Speaker, has provided the framework for a quality Australian Public Service which has been capable of responding to the tremendous changes in Australian society since it came into effect in 1922. In fact, the Commonwealth has always been the leader in public administration is Australia. Why would we not want to follow in their footsteps, Madam Speaker?
If the Assembly, in the event, should decide to amend the Bill to remove agencies such as the DPP, then I would make it very clear to the Assembly that I would not regard a Minister of this Government as being accountable to the Assembly for that body - and we have had this discussion before. Madam Speaker, if the Assembly expects a body to be independent and not subject to ministerial direction, then I do not see that the Minister should be held responsible when the operations of that body fail to hold up to scrutiny.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .