Page 2811 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 24 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Greens. What will end up happening is that there will be no outcome, because we will have three different positions.
We will not support this amendment and we will not support an amended motion to that effect, because we constantly see this watering down, really just for the sake of it. I can understand if there is a fundamental difference of opinion; vote against the motion if you do not like it, or give us a substantive reason to amend it. But this to me seems simply an attempt by the Greens to have their version of the motion, which really in substance is not that different. But we will not support it, and I think it is a very poor way of going forward. It will not lead to outcomes where, particularly from time to time, the Greens and the Liberal Party are able to combine to keep the government accountable, if all it is about is putting in the Greens’ words rather than the Liberals’ words.
If there is no fundamental problem with the motion, you should vote for it and you should not seek to amend it. I did not hear anything from Ms Le Couteur in that speech that suggests that there is any fundamental problem with what we have put forward. The quotes that are in there actually set a very important context, which is why I referred to them in my speech. For that reason, we will not be supporting the amendment.
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (10.45): I commend Mr Seselja for bringing forward this motion, and I support him in the comments he just made about the Greens’ amendment. It is a very important motion here today and it needs to be put in the context of Mr Smyth’s bill that he introduced this morning, and also in terms of Mr Stanhope’s attack last Friday on the Auditor-General. So it is a very timely motion and very appropriate.
We all here had a chance to reflect on the importance of the Auditor-General, the role that she plays in the community and the importance of the role that she provides. I will quote from the annual report, and I think we can all agree with this:
The ACT Legislative Assembly and the ACT community rely on the Audit Office to provide impartial assurance on whether public money is being efficiently and effectively spent and whether financial and performance reports for the Territory and its agencies present a credible, true and fair view of their performance.
Indeed, that is the nub of the matter. That is the importance of the audit office, of the Auditor-General, and that is why it is so important that she maintains her independence and she maintains her line of funding that enables her to do that immensely important job both for the community and for the Assembly.
If we look at the list of audits that she has conducted in recent years, we will see things like management of respite care services, delivery of ambulance services, the Calvary hospital arrangements, administration of the Freedom of Information Act, aged care assessment program, Rhodium Asset Solutions Ltd, reporting on ecologically sustainable development, courts administration, workers compensation, waiting lists for elective surgery—and on and on. As we can see, these are not trivial matters; they are matters that go to safety, workplace safety, emergency waiting lists
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .