Page 5233 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 18 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (4.57): I move amendment No 3 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 5264].
Just so that it is quite clear, this revokes the new instrument that Mr Barr had to put in place when it was discovered that his instrument of late June was, in fact, in breach of the law. It is just so that there is absolute clarity in this—that is, given what we have passed already, there will only be up to two public servants on the EPIC board.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Planning, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation and Minister for Gaming and Racing) (4.58): Given the obvious outcome of this, the government will not seek to oppose this particular amendment from Mr Smyth. I do want to place on record my appreciation for the work of those members who have engaged in EPIC board activities through 2009 and acknowledge that, on the passage of this bill, the involvement of some will come to an end. That is unfortunate, but, nonetheless, that, as I said, is life, and we will move on.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Deputy Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Health and Minister for Industrial Relations) (4.58): This is one of the final opportunities I have to speak on the bill in this debate. I want to clear up any confusion that the Liberal opposition have. The government’s in-principle support, or the fact that we did not call for a vote on this bill at the in-principle stage, is because we read the numbers and it was very clear this bill was going to get through. However, as to the issues that Mr Smyth identified around skills and experience pertaining to Actew—I think he quoted the Chief Minister—the government would argue that the arrangements for the appointment of the Actew board are quite different to that in relation to EPIC. The reasons the government believed EPIC no longer required a board is because the skills and the expertise already rest within government and it is a duplication of effort. That is not the same in relation to some of the other territory-owned corporations. For example, the territory events section of Territory and Municipal Services already manages a number of venues, such as Canberra Stadium and Manuka.
Mr Barr: They used to have boards.
MS GALLAGHER: Yes, they previously had boards. They no longer have boards, and it is quite peculiar, I think, that Mr Smyth has taken such a furious position on the EPIC arrangements and is quite happy to see continued duplication of effort through the maintenance of an EPIC board when other events areas within government are managed within the one area inside government. However, being the Labor Party, we can count numbers. We know when we are going to lose, so the acceptance that this bill was going to get through required the government to make the amendments it has. I have to say that, at the end of this debate, we will be unhappy about this legislation, but, as it is the will of the Assembly, we will work within it.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video