Page 2350 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We had a situation of a recall last year when the Chief Minister came back and answered questions. We might not have liked some of the answers we got and we may not have found them particularly enlightening at times—there were a number of examples of misleads during that power station process—but at least the Chief Minister came back when asked to do so by the Assembly committee. The planning minister showed absolute contempt for the Assembly and for the estimates process. You cannot have open and accountable government if ministers simply refuse to show up.
Now the task will be for the Assembly to consider this matter. People will have the chance to read the estimates report and to look into this issue and at what further action is needed. It does recommend that the Assembly take further action. It is one of the most blatant examples of thumbing your nose at openness and transparency that we have seen for some time. We also saw the planning minister in his role as education minister using government resources for party political purposes through the office of his chief of staff. We saw that also come out in estimates, and I have dealt with that a little bit today.
I wanted to deal with the health minister as well—what we saw at estimates on openness and accountability. We saw it in relation to the use of the hospital for ALP ads. Both the education minister’s office and the health minister directly use their offices in order to arrange for party political ALP advertising, but what is critically important in the context of this discussion about openness and accountability is this. When we asked them—it was only when we asked questions about it; I think it was originally through questions on notice that we asked it—about whether government facilities were used, we were originally told by the health minister that they were used. Then we sought documentation. There was not one scrap of documentation to back this up. All we had in this process was the health minister getting on the phone to the CEO of Health and saying, “Would it be okay if the Labor Party used the hospital for an ad?” There was not one scrap of documentary evidence.
How is that for openness and accountability? How would the Greens have gone if they had tried calling the CEO of ACT Health and asking if they could use it for a Greens ad—or the Liberal Party, the Motorist Party or any of the other parties that stood at the last ACT Assembly election? I suggest to you that they would have had a somewhat tougher time in getting access to the hospital and I suggest that there probably would have been reams of documentation for any of these party representatives to fill out in order to use a hospital for a party political ad.
For the Labor Party in government, all it took was a phone call from the minister to the CEO of Health and it was arranged. Was there an email? No. Was there a letter? No. Was there a document, a form, an insurance form or anything to sign to back this up? Not that we are aware of. With all the questions we have asked, we have not been provided with one scrap of paper. How is that for openness and accountability?
We have a continuing politicisation of the public service, an attempt to politicise the public service by this government, by the ministers in this government. Indeed, Ms Gallagher is one of the worst offenders, it would seem, from the evidence that we have had.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .