Page 871 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 2 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
standards plumbed by the federal Liberal government, I know that something has gone horribly, horribly wrong.
While I am on the topic of the corrupting influence of majority power on open and accountable governance, I commend to all members the book Silencing Dissent by Sarah Maddison and Clive Hamilton. In it one sees a chilling coincidence of tactics and developments which occur at both ACT and commonwealth level. This process is most clearly evident in both governments’ retreat from transparency and meaningful public consultation. Consider the following passage from the code:
Labor understands that good government does not bully. It leads. Good government accepts criticism. Good government has the courage to allow itself to be closely scrutinised. It conducts itself in an open, honest and accountable manner, not in secret.
Well, what happened to those high ideals? At least one government minister appears to think it casts him in a positive light when he boasts of his power and propensity to bully, punish or ignore community groups who dare to disagree with him. And the vigour with which the government has resisted attempts by the community to discover the basis on which the last budget was developed is a measure of how far it has shifted from its commitment to open government. To use the Costello report, which was prepared with no public input, as justification for its budget cuts and then to withhold the entire report from public scrutiny demonstrates a breathtaking contempt for the very notion of public consultation or open government. If people do not know the basis and assumptions on which their representatives are making decisions, how can they accurately assess whether their own values and interests are being represented?
Too often we are seeing policies announced after they have been fully formed, and then the spectacle of hapless ministers listening to the public outcry is characterised as public consultation. And, of course, the policies contain enough wriggle room to allow for a few minor changes in response to the public outcry, which can be characterised as responsive government. I know the individuals in this government are far too clever and politically aware to hold an honest belief that such practices represent open and accountable government. Rather, they are political games and manoeuvres born out of perceived self-interest.
The government still pays lip-service to open government, presumably because its left wing and a large proportion of Labor voters still believe that open government is a goal worth pursuing. This is a quote from Labor’s 2006 policy platform:
Labor is committed to democratic and open government for the citizens of the ACT.
The fundamental principle underlying the governing of the ACT should be the development of the highest degree of community participation in the decision making process as possible. It is a basic right of all ACT citizens to be involved in making decisions, which affect them.
And just in case anyone thinks the ALP’s platform is intended to be regarded as mere puffery, this is what the document itself says of it:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .