Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 8 Hansard (29 October) . . Page.. 2460 ..
MR MOORE: Thank you, Mr Rugendyke. What a timely question indeed! I spent basically all of lunchtime with somebody from my office discussing the very issue of appointments to the Disability Services Advisory Committee. No, I have not reappointed anybody to the advisory committee. I have asked the Department of Health and Community Care to provide me with a series of advices about how to deal with advisory committees. Less than an hour ago, I determined that with each of these advisory committees - there are a number of them within the Department of Health and Community Care - I would wish to meet with them at least three times a year. There are some conditions that I would like to look at in terms of each of them and I have asked my office staff to arrange a meeting with the chairs of each of my advisory committees. I did that literally only a few minutes ago.
In terms of the Disability Services Advisory Committee, I have a list of possible names of people to go on the committee and I am debating what is the best way to deal with it. I believe that the person you have spoken of has provided very good service and I need to make a decision as to whether I think that that should continue or that it is time for a fresh approach, which in no way diminishes the value of the contribution he has made. I am of the view that, after a term or two terms in such positions, it is probably time to give somebody else a try so that we get a fresh view. I am working on that at the moment.
You also asked about when they had last met. To the best of my knowledge, they have not met since that time.
MR HARGREAVES: My question is also to the Acting Chief Minister. Minister, can you tell us whether it is true - I am referring a bit to this document, for your assistance - that some of the senior executives of ACTEW who have had their contracts renewed for five years actually had two years or more to run on their contracts? Is it true that none of those people who have had a so-called renewal of their contracts have actually had their four-year contracts expire?
MR HUMPHRIES: The extent of my information is coextensive with what is in this letter from Mr Mackay. He says, in the third paragraph:
In virtually all cases this meant that contracts were extended from their existing four-year period to a five-year period.
I understand that there were eight contracts; so I interpret the words "virtually all cases" to mean that there were one or possibly two exceptions to that statement that there were four-year contracts extended to five years. I do not know exactly how many might have been in some different position, but I assume from this that there were some.