Page 3220 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 13 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The government has no objection to that level of scrutiny.
I understand it will be the case that the government has retained, on this occasion, a commitment to openness and accountability and appropriate scrutiny. Openness and accountability are, of course, two of the most important characteristics of a government that is committed to good governance, and it is certainly in the public interest for expenditure to be scrutinised. That is why we have an estimates process for the main appropriation bill and why this second appropriation should be referred to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
It is in the public interest for governments to be open and accountable and to be prepared to face scrutiny because, at the end of the day, it is public money being spent. These are taxes that have been raised across the board to fund this government’s spending program, and I certainly think that there will be a wide level of public interest and possible concern over this latest decision to embark on more spending.
There is always a danger when government achieves a majority for abuses to occur. I note that the opposition has already been forced this year to introduce legislation to make it a legislative requirement within the ACT for the Treasurer to prepare and table a capital works program progress report for every quarter. I would hope that the government might consider supporting that initiative given that they claim to be committed to openness in government.
It is an indictment on a government's commitment to openness and honesty that practices that have, in the past, been undertaken by convention are tossed aside through weight of numbers. It is certainly my hope—I believe it will be the case here today—that the government will support this motion and refer this bill to the public accounts committee.
These expenditure proposals must be examined. The motion calls for the public accounts committee to report back to the Assembly by 4 December 2007. This will, of course, still enable the government to debate and, with its majority, inevitably pass this new appropriation bill before Christmas. Mr Speaker, I commend this motion to the Assembly. It does nothing more than ensure appropriate levels of scrutiny are applied to this government.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (11.01): As the Greens representative in the Assembly and, of course, as the chair of the public accounts committee, I welcome this appropriation bill, and I endorse Mr Mulcahy’s motion to refer it to the public accounts committee. However, given that the motion was not discussed with me prior to its presentation, I am not across the detail of the first part of the motion. Thank you for reading it out so clearly, Mr Mulcahy, but I would have appreciated some discussion prior to you giving it to us. However, I expect that the Assembly understands the historical reasons why this may have been the case.
I am aware also that the government was itself going to move that the appropriation bill be referred to the public accounts committee. That would appear to me to be the appropriate way for it to go. I am also aware that one week, which is what we will
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .