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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 9 Hansard (19 November) . . Page.. 2716 ..

MR BERRY: It has been used before. I will withdraw it if it upsets you, Mr Humphries, just to make sure the flow of the debate continues. "Arrangement", in the scheme of things, has all the necessary connotations. I heard Mrs Carnell complaining about not being able to get the money because she could not anticipate this move today. My colleague Mr Stanhope made a correct point. It is a silly argument, because Mr Kaine could not have anticipated it two days ago. He was not sure that he was going to put his motion forward. It is a silly argument for the Chief Minister to say that the reason that she cannot go to the Treasurer's Advance is that this was anticipated. Clearly, it could not have been.

I have some questions about the staff salary allocation system that the Government has adopted, but, given that they have established a principle for some crossbenchers, I do not think they can avoid the fact they have to provide a standard and non-discriminatory approach to these sorts of things. Mr Kaine is entitled to a staff salary allocation along the same lines as that which applies to other crossbenchers. When talking about this, everybody has to understand that in the past arrangements have been entered into to keep the Government comfortable. If you enter into those sorts of arrangements and set a standard, you have to apply the same standard to people of the same ilk.

MR OSBORNE: I seek leave to move the amendment circulated in my name, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Leave granted.

MR OSBORNE: I move the following amendment to Ms Tucker's amendment:

Omit all words after "which" and substitute the following words: "sets the staff salary allocation for Mr Kaine at the same level as that of Mr Osborne, Mr Rugendyke and Ms Tucker in such a way that would not increase the level of funds currently allocated to staffing for non Executive Members.".

As I said in my speech, I am not prepared to force the Government to spend any more money, but I am prepared to give up some money from my allocation, as is Mr Rugendyke, to go towards Mr Kaine. I think this is a more reasonable solution to this whole issue than trying to play the games that we are playing at the moment.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Osborne, is that the amendment you circulated earlier?

MR OSBORNE: Yes, it is, Mr Deputy Speaker.

MS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (4.40): I am speaking to Mr Osborne's amendment. Mr Deputy Speaker, comments were made before that somehow money was found from elsewhere in the Territorial budget the last time that salaries increased. That is not the case, according to my advice. The Assembly budget is territorial in nature.

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