Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 1139 ..

Mr Speaker, the motion that I am moving also asks that no transfers of funds occur between programs during the supply period without members of the Assembly being advised. I have moved that way for the simple reason that I am so concerned at the broad-brush approach of the present Government that I believe that the Assembly must be advised if, for instance, there is going to be a transfer of funds between the government schooling program and the private schooling program.

I want to go on the record again saying that the level of detail in the Supply Bill is not sufficient and that in future the Government's financial legislation must be far more detailed, to allow proper scrutiny by the Assembly. I accept Mrs Carnell's point that the Supply Bill is not an accounting document. We do not test the Supply Bill in the same way that we test the budget estimates, for example. However, it is a very significant amount of money. This Assembly has always taken very seriously its duty to scrutinise the financial management of the government, whatever government has been in place, and I believe that we ought to maintain that stance. I think it has served not just the Assembly and its members but also the people of the Territory very well to have that level of scrutiny and for the government to maintain full accountability to the Assembly.

Mr Speaker, I commend the motion to the Assembly. I would rather not have had to move it. I have made it clear that I would not attempt to thwart supply, but we need on the books a motion which does justice to the concern about the current Supply Bill that I have heard expressed by all parties in the Assembly apart from the Government.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (5.35): I believe that at lunchtime today I gave the information that Ms Follett and others were after yesterday. I gave it after a large amount of work from Treasury officials last night and this morning. It equates to the supply appropriations Part 1 summary, which was the breakdown of last year's Supply Bill; so it does give the same information as was given in the past. It equates it to the new administrative units and programs. It shows how, say, education - the area of concern raised yesterday - is broken down into government schooling, non-government schooling, CIT and training. That is what we are talking about.

Ms Follett: That was the old program. That is my worry. The new one does not.

MRS CARNELL: What we are saying is that that is the amount of money that is appropriated this time in those areas, and it equates across into the new areas.

Ms McRae: No, it is not the same.

MRS CARNELL: I am sorry; it does.

Ms McRae: It is not the same.

MRS CARNELL: It is the same. The information that we have been asked for, I believe, we have produced already, at least down to the level that we were asked for yesterday - for example, how much money has been appropriated for government schooling and non-government schooling. Obviously, areas like health have always been single-line appropriations in supply Bills. We believe that we have given that information already.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .