Page 4117 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 13 December 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (5.42): Ms Porter’s motion presumably provides an opportunity to repeat a lot of things about WorkChoices, Welfare to Work and middle-class welfare and why the federal government has got that wrong. I agree with much of Ms Porter’s position. But what I found most interesting is not the Standing Committee on Family and Human Services report into balancing work and family itself, but rather the letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives from the Labor deputy chair of the committee, Julia Irwin, articulating some of the aberrations of process that occurred in its preparation. It shows us what can happen when governments feel that they are not answerable to a wider parliament, such as occurs when a government has a Senate majority. Perhaps it is a lesson for this house too. With the Assembly’s indulgence, I want to take this opportunity to read that letter: It states:
Dear David
referring to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Hon. David Hawker—
I am writing to express my grave concerns about many aspects of a parliamentary inquiry and the ensuing report, stemming from the unprofessional conduct of the committee chair.
As raised with you this morning, Labor members of the Committee on Family and Human Services are deeply disappointed by a variety of actions and decisions taken in recent weeks by the Member for Mackellar—
that is, Bronwyn Bishop—
Chairperson of the Committee’s inquiry into balancing work and family.
The final report as agreed by the committee on Monday—necessarily in the absence of Labor members—is likely not to reflect the views of the committee as a whole. I say likely rather than certainly only because at the time of writing I have been denied access to the final report or even the latest draft.
I wish to bring to your attention the following matters.
1. Labor members of the Committee, including the Deputy Chair, have been denied access to the final report as adopted by the Committee in our absence on Monday 4 December.
2. Economic modelling on key recommendations of the report, commissioned by the Committee and paid for by the taxpayer (at the price of $17 000), was delivered to my office at 10:30 am this morning but had not been circulated to other Labor members of the Committee at the time of writing.
3. This information has been provided to Liberal members.
4. Labor members of the Committee have been insulted by the decision of the Chair—acting outside her powers—to enable them to merely ‘view’ the consultant’s report in her office or in the office of the secretariat,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .