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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4208 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Other jurisdictions have confronted this problem by providing for the costing of election promises at public expense. In 1998 the federal parliament enacted the Charter of Budget Honesty Act, which provides that government agencies cost the promises of parties contesting elections.

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, I turn to the approach that is used in this particular bill, which is slightly different to the one used in the Commonwealth legislation. The procedure provided for by this bill is that, six months or more before an election, the Treasurer is to appoint an independent assessor who has the task of costing election promises. The assessor could be an individual, presumably with qualifications in accounting or a related field; a company which specialises in such work; or perhaps a partnership.

Although this is the Treasurer's decision, his instrument of appointment is a disallowable instrument and, if there is disquiet about the person or body appointed, that decision can be overturned by the Assembly. The appointment lasts until election day. The minister may promulgate guidelines for the work of the independent assessor.

Parties in the Assembly may then submit their policies to the assessor for costing and will have to do so between 30 and 60 days prior to the election. The assessor can seek additional information, if required, from the parties concerned or even turn to government agencies for assistance in formulating a costing. At least 10 days before polling day the assessor publicly releases those costings for the community to scrutinise.

I do not pretend that this bill will end controversy about the costing of election promises. In fact, it may well generate some controversy as particular costings are put forward and people debate what they mean and how they compare and whether they are accurate. But a demonstrable level of impartiality will be introduced into this debate, and there will be a sense of quality and resource attached to the process of formulating costings. It is an important step forward in enhancing accountability and transparency within the ACT electoral system.

If electors are uncertain as to what to believe in the blizzard of claim and counterclaim before each election, at least one thing might be believable: the work done by a publicly funded, independent assessor to cost election promises. That would be enhanced by the person belonging to a reputable firm in the accounting field or a related field.

I note that only yesterday the Treasurer tabled the government's budget consultation documents for the 2003-04 budget. That document described the government's objectives for the budget process and its broader agenda. It said that the government was "open, honest, measured and responsible". A measure such as the one I have tabled today should enhance the concept of government being open, honest, measured and responsible, and I hope it will attract support on that basis.

I commend the bill to the house.

Debate (on motion by Mr Quinlan ) adjourned to the next sitting.

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