Page 2015 - Week 06 - Thursday, 8 June 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
that. They are certainly more far-reaching than I have had a chance to have a good look at. I heard Mr Barr give his economics 1 approach to the management of the public service. It may well be shared by more people in this place. I know that it is a prevailing view, but it seems to me that the logical outcome and progression of a view like that is that we might as well govern this place by web site. Anyway, I am just putting that on the record.
Mr Stefaniak’s amendments do not cover the ACTION Authority, for instance. I have not had a chance to consult on whether it is a good thing to get rid of it. Maybe it should be included in the amendments; I do not know. I do not think that Mr Stefaniak has had a chance to look at all this stuff either, but at least it is a recognition that there is a lot of very deep stuff here that is going to have profound impacts on people’s lives. I am just becoming aware of the number of jobs involved and the way, for instance, the environment department is going to be organised. It is literally disappearing. How people will do their jobs under these circumstances just needs to have more of our attention than it is getting here tonight.
Amendment negatived.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Clause 3 agreed to.
Clause 4.
MR STEFANIAK (Ginninderra—Leader of the Opposition) (9.40): I move amendment No 2 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 2037].
As I said, there are three main areas in this regard. This amendment omits a section repealing the Australian Capital Tourism Act 1997. Briefly, picking up something which Dr Foskey said, which my colleague Mr Mulcahy said in relation to another bill and which the Chief Minister said, yes, there are quite often bills which come in with budget papers, but I do not think I can recall from all my years in this Assembly those bills being more complex than the revenue bill that we have dealt with and this bill, which is a major bill and which we have only had 48 hours to look at. That is a quite significant fact.
I thank Dr Foskey for mentioning that. I think it is worthy of note here that members have only been given a particular amount of time. I can recall situations in the past where these types of bills would be sent to an estimates committee for a proper going-over. If the government ever does anything like this again, I think that that would be a very sensible step to take. I certainly hope that we will not have again a situation where the Assembly, in a very busy period during the budget sittings of three days, has to consider bills of the complexity of this one in such a short time.
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (9.41): I would like to say a few words in relation to this amendment, both to make an observation in relation to the Chief Minister’s comments and to endorse indeed many of the remarks that were made by Mr Smyth in relation to the tourism industry. Talking about this matter in a broader sense, the concern which Mr Stefaniak has alluded to is one about which I feel quite strongly. What we have been
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .