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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 10 Hansard (24 November) . . Page.. 2774 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

As far as I am concerned, that is fine. But exactly how the committee operates and what it is attempting to achieve, how it deals with the issues of finance and annual reports, how it deals with the divided system that we now use, which is quite different from before, are all issues that raise questions.

It seems to me that having somebody independent of the Government and the Assembly to look at the process from the outside and say, "Look, there might be a more efficient way of going about the process", and to look at the process that Mr Berry used to involve the community, something that I thought was a very innovative and good idea to obtain a better involvement of the community in our processes, and say that the system could be improved in this way or that would be a very useful exercise, because our Estimates Committee process is a very important part of how this Assembly functions and the accountability of this Assembly. I do not think it is something that we should be frightened of; nor do I think it is something that we should attempt to make political mileage out of. It is just something that I think is due, and it is something that I ask members to consider quite seriously. That is the broad general comment that I have to make. Mr Speaker, I have a series of comments to make about the report as it is, starting with the first recommendation of the committee, which reads:

The committee recommends that the diversion of ministers from their portfolio responsibilities to promote and deal with their insignificant executive private member's business be avoided.

Mr Speaker, I think that it would be appropriate, if we are to follow down that path, to ask members whether it is appropriate for them to be involved in the activities of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. I think most members would say that it is important for them to be involved in it because, as well as their duties as a member and how they deal with their constituency issues, there is a range of other issues that they deal with. It would be appropriate to ask members whether it is appropriate for the Ministers to deal just with their portfolio areas and not deal with constituency inquiries. Should I now stop dealing with my individual constituents? That is the logic here. For some reason, Mr Speaker, this concerns particularly Mr Berry. There is an interesting comment, a bit of doublespeak, in paragraph 3.2 of the report, Mr Speaker.

Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, I do not think "doublespeak" is allowed.

MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, in the interests of moving along, I will withdraw "doublespeak", but on the understanding that it is not necessarily setting a precedent. Mr Speaker, for the committee's report to say that there was no precedent for this but the Assembly suspended standing orders to allow the Chief Minister to introduce a Bill is silly, because that does indicate that there was a precedent for it. Besides, it reflected on the vote of the Assembly.

Mr Speaker, I must say that the issue of silliness in this report also worries me somewhat. There is a reference to "Setting the Agenda". Money had been spent, work had been going ahead and, in an attempt to provide as much information as we could in the annual report, there was a series of references, and then the committee says, "Don't give us so much information. Wait until the following year". That is just silly, Mr Speaker. I note paragraph 3.70, which reads:

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