Page 409 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 December 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We should bear in mind when looking at Assembly funding that the electorate voted for a changed Assembly and they expect it to deliver. The funding for extra resources for the new and existing committees will assist in providing the type of scrutiny expected of a changed Assembly. Already the climate change committee is in receipt of a referral to conduct a most significant inquiry into a greenhouse gas emissions target for the ACT and to report by mid-2009. It seems to me that this is a minimal allocation today and will allow this Assembly to get off on the front foot.
The Greens support enhanced accountability for the ACT executive to take account of the Remuneration Tribunal determination taking effect from 1 July 2008. This money is important to give the executive the resources it needs to manage the additional accountability and collaborative requirements of the new Assembly. Extra committees and further collaboration with the opposition and the crossbench require extra time and effort, and to me it is reasonable to provide funding for it.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Treasurer, Minister for Health, Minister for Community Services and Minister for Women) (8.20): The reason this has been named “increased accountability and transparency” is that the people of Canberra voted for a new Assembly, a different type of Assembly. They installed a third major party into the Assembly. They sought increased accountability and transparency from all of their members and this goes part way to meeting that desire of the Canberra community.
More work will be required from our officers in terms of some of the arrangements we have agreed to as part of the parliamentary agreement but also more broadly around how the Assembly shall work. The committee secretary is part of this allocation, also the pay rise for members, and some of what we understand the Remuneration Tribunal will award in terms of allowing the Greens party status. That is why it has been named this way. You have more information about this initiative than you would have been able to get through a truncated estimates hearing.
Subclauses 7(1) and 7(2) agreed to.
Subclause 7(3).
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (8.21): Subclause 7(3) relates to the ACT executive. Maybe the minister does need additional staff to help her to be more accountable, but it was interesting that in her closing speech she had a number of things to say and admitted, “This is not the ideal way to do it.” If it is not the ideal way and you stand here and you admit that it is not the ideal way, why didn’t you seek to do it earlier? Why have the five weeks off? Why go on holiday for five weeks? Today it is 36 days since this—
Members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order!
MR SMYTH: That is five weeks. There are normally two sitting weeks in November. We could have had two sitting weeks if this was urgent. We could have had a proper
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .