Page 3678 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am amazed that the Greens do not believe that that is worthy of scrutiny. Taking “political interference” out of this motion says that the Greens believe that the way this government operates and the way it affects their departments is okay. That is not honest. That is not open. That is not accountable. It is there as a recommendation: “This problem is so bad, let’s set up a catalogue. We’ll keep a litany, a list of things that people like Minister Hargreaves ask to be done without any funding.”
That is how bad the problem is and that is why part (c) should remain. It is political influence that has caused this problem. It is the minister ringing and demanding things to be done—not being held accountable. His fingerprints do not appear anywhere. The letters are not there; the minutes are not there. The department has been advised by a reputable accounting firm to set up a register to keep track of what the minister has told it to do. The ministers will not stand up for themselves and the department wears the odium.
It is interesting. We asked about this report in the estimates. There were several days when the report came up. I refer to 26 May, just three months ago today. I asked Mr Stanhope some questions. I will quote myself:
MR SMYTH: I see on page 100 of budget paper 3 in table 4.2.18, the second line, that Territory and Municipal Services are expected to find $7 million over the coming years as part of the efficiency dividend.
That is in this current year. I continued:
Before we go there, Ernst & Young, I think it was, were helping the department to find supposedly $10 million worth of savings. Have Ernst & Young given you their report and have $10 million worth of savings been found?
Mr Stanhope, the Chief Minister, the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, answered:
No. The department commissioned Ernst & Young for advice in relation to financial management and strategic planning, but the report was not commissioned on the basis of making suggestions or finding savings and it does not provide that.
Let me read this again. The Greens want to take out—they will vote for the removal of—“political interference”. But here we have a Chief Minister who says:
… the report was not commissioned on the basis of making suggestions or finding savings and it does not provide that.
Well, interesting! Let us find out what the report was commissioned for. Page 8 outlines the key findings against the terms of reference page. Let us go to page 5, just to make it very clear and make it very simple for people to follow this through. Section 1.1 is “Key Findings Against Terms of Reference”. It starts on page 5. On page 8, we get to reference paragraph 1.1.6, still under the “Key Findings Against Terms of Reference” section. It says “Identify possible cost savings”. Goodness me!
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .