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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (18 June) . . Page.. 1713 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

The Treasurer's explanation for this was that it was because of changed administrative arrangements. The Estimates Committee recommended that she get comparative figures for the following year. Then the following year she came in again without comparative figures. What was her explanation this time? Her explanation was that this time they could not be included because they had changed the accounting system to output-based accrual budgeting and they could not produce comparative figures. The Estimates Committee said again, "We want to see comparative figures next year".

So, what happened this year? Once again the budget papers do not contain the comparative figures that were asked for by the Estimates Committee. What is the Government's excuse this year? The first year it was that they had changed the administrative arrangements; the second year it was that they had changed the accounting system; this year it is that they would not fit on the page. That was their explanation of why they could not provide the figures. That is how committed they are to accountability. The explanation was, "I am sorry; we could not fit them on the page; so, you cannot have them". It shows what a low level of commitment they have to accountability.

Mr Speaker, this Bill also includes amendments pertaining to forward estimates. The Government obviously does not see the need for these to be included in the Act, although they are included in the budget papers. These provisions will ensure that they are included in the budget papers. The provisions in the Act relating to the budget papers fail to require any reference to be made to public trading enterprises. I believe it is important that the budget papers contain information about public trading enterprises, even if these are not budget funded, and my amendment Bill is designed to ensure that such an important arm of government, namely, its public trading enterprises, will have to comply with the same level of reporting and scrutiny as other agencies of government. I believe this is absolutely appropriate. I do not believe the establishment of something as a full-fee cost-recovery unit or as a corporation should exempt it from the same level of reporting and scrutiny as agencies within the general government sector.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, I believe these amendments are sensible and reasonable. They build on the Chief Minister's work last year in relation to the financial management reforms, which themselves built on Labor's work on accrual accounting when we were in government. Labor believes that, because of the current Government's chequered approach to public reporting of their financial circumstances and their delivery against their performance measures, we had no recourse other than legislation. The amendments are in response to a deliberate and disappointing performance by the Government. The Government has shown that they dislike scrutiny and dislike being questioned. They have demonstrated that they are willing to duck and weave to avoid that scrutiny. The Bill is a sign that Labor in government will act with integrity and transparency. It demonstrates Labor's commitment to high levels of scrutiny and accountability. I urge support for this Bill.

Debate (on motion by Mrs Carnell) adjourned.

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