Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (13 June) . . Page.. 1596 ..
MR HIRD (continuing):
territory. This was notwithstanding the fact that at certain times a political slant would be taken on a particular item.
It is interesting to note the membership of the Select Committee on Estimates 1994-95, whose report was tabled in this place when this government was then in opposition. The membership was: chairperson, Helen Szuty; deputy chairperson, Gary Humphries, and members Wayne Berry, Kate Carnell, Greg Cornwell, Tony De Domenico; Annette Ellis, Ellnor Grassby, Trevor Kaine, Michael Moore and Lou Westende. That report contained 37 recommendations. If you look at Hansard you will find that each of those members put their own political slant on their understanding of the estimates process, but there was not-and I repeat that there was not-a dissenting report.
It saddens me to see that the committee system, which I believe is the backbone of this institution, has been weakened.
Mr Quinlan: Don't go too far, Harold. Come on, you're in this, mate.
MR HIRD: If it gets too hot in the kitchen, Ted, get out of it. We should ensure that Mr Quinlan never ever again chairs a committee of this place. He has made an absolute mockery of the committee process. He made it clear to members of the committee that he was not interested in the evidence; that he was not interested in opinions that were not in line with his; that he was out to use this as an exercise in political thuggery; and that he intended to impose his own bias on the final report-and he also gave me a cold to boot.
As a result, the whole Assembly stands condemned. Who will ever trust a committee report again, Mr Speaker? This man wants to be Chief Minister, and the deals are being done and the knives are being sharpened. I do not think even his closest ally would support him after this abysmal performance. My colleague Jacqui Burke and I have obviously dissented from his report. As I said earlier when we attempted to table the report, we intended to follow this course.
Mr Quinlan: You said "two weeks ago".
MR HIRD: Well, if you doubt that, Mr Quinlan, you should ask our colleague, Mr Rugendyke. I indicated right at the beginning after you had tabled the report that the report was biased. As I have just pointed out, you said that it was slanted in your direction. Ask Mr Rugendyke.
Jacqui Burke and I have dissented from the report in the knowledge that the committee chairman-you, Mr Quinlan-openly admitted that the draft document put forward for consideration and deliberation reflected his own bias. The report is greatly political and contains many errors of fact and numerous examples of misunderstanding of the budgetary process. There was absolutely no choice left to us but to dissent.
Mr Speaker, any proper evaluation of the Humphries government's 2001-2002 budget would have to start with the fact that this government inherited an operating loss of $344 million. You may well ask why this loss has disappeared. It has gone because of the prudent management of this side of the house. As a result, we can step forward with some opportunities to do some good for our community.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .