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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 10 Hansard (7 December) . . Page.. 2821 ..

Mr Kaine: It is a pity she did not do that.

MRS CARNELL: It is a pity she did not do that and a pity now that they have backed away from the statements she made. She said that she did not want ours to be a littler version of the Commonwealth Public Service. She said that she wanted an ACT government service that was tailored to the needs of the ACT, not the Commonwealth, and would extend, as she said, to the review of structures, management and culture - exactly what we are doing with this Bill. I am surprised that those opposite have backed away from what 12 months ago was an innovative approach. Does being in opposition make you backward looking and horribly conservative? It obviously does to those opposite.

Despite all this rhetoric, of which I am pleased to remind all members, Ms Follett now criticises the Government for daring to change the Commonwealth approach to senior executive appointment and employment. This is a previous Chief Minister who last year spoke about a public service that was very much our own public service, that did not reflect the Commonwealth. This is something to do with Ms Follett's very special line dance, something we know Ms Follett is very keen on: One step forward and five steps back. Last year it was one step forward, but, boy, we have gone backwards since then.

The PAC report, that is, Ms Follett's so-called majority report, and I stress so-called, implies unfairly and inaccurately - - -

Ms Follett: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I think it is a reflection on the committee to call it a so-called majority report. It was, in fact, a majority report. I think that imputation should be withdrawn.

MRS CARNELL: I certainly withdraw any imputation on the PAC. (Extension of time granted) The PAC's report, that is, the report Ms Follett brought down, unfairly and inaccurately said that there was not proper consultation with our SES. She is wrong, wrong, wrong. There has been more consultation on this issue than on just about any other.

Ms Follett: It is the union that said that.

MRS CARNELL: Through you, Mr Speaker, I will suggest that Ms Follett stop and listen just for a moment. If she did, she would hear that our public service wishes to see the Commonwealth Public Service as its poor cousin instead of a continuation of the current myth, and I believe it is a myth, that we are theirs. Our SES want to be recognised as professional and the best and most innovative in their field. I spoke to just about all SES officers in the consultation period that led up to this Bill. That means I went out myself and spoke to them. I know that we have some of the best SES officers in this country, and they want to show just how good they are.

I also draw a matter to the attention of the crossbenchers, particularly in relation to some of Mr Moore's policies in this area. Mr Moore has always been very forthcoming, shall we say, in areas such as performance and accountability. In fact, Mr Moore's policy statement seeks to promote innovation, initiative, continuity. He seeks to ensure

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