Page 4007 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 20 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
As I said, we believe that the committee will be the place that can explore these issues. The process is far from ideal. Whilst I do say that, I think that proper investigation will provide the outcome that is probably needed. It would have been better to have some more time today. Unfortunately, that is not to happen but the Greens will support Mr Smyth’s motion to send this matter to a privileges committee.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Minister for Health and Minister for Industrial Relations) (10.36): It appears that the Select Committee on Privileges will be established. I will just put some comments on the record today. This is not around many of the issues Ms Hunter has just spoken about—that is, whether committees are given proper respect. This inquiry is actually to examine whether there was improper interference with the free exercise of an Assembly committee or its authority. So I think we just need to be clear what the privileges committee is actually being established to inquire into.
If I can reflect on this from my own point of view, I came to this role with an openness and transparency agenda. I saw no reason—indeed the law provided no reason—for me to withhold the preferred nomination of the Auditor-General from the community. This is something I thought about. We are doing a lot of new things in this government in terms of providing information to the community. We are publishing cabinet outcomes and we are putting more reports online that have not traditionally been made public. I saw no reason why making public a government nomination, subject to appropriate processes, was in any way in conflict with the work of the committee or, indeed, why I should keep that nomination secret, which is what Mr Smyth appears to think I should have done. Nobody has really provided me with a reason why I should have done that.
If, of course, the Assembly wants to take a view that all government nominations to appointments need to be kept secret from the public, then let us have that debate and stand up and argue why a significant appointment like the Auditor-General and a proposal by the government for that position should be kept secret.
In relation to the process, I wrote to the chair of the committee. That letter was transferred to her office. I later found out that that letter was then transferred unopened to the committee office where it was opened later. My intention was to provide the committee with notice, ahead of the issuing of that media statement, of the proposed nomination. That did not happen. I cannot answer why that did not happen other than I made every effort to make sure that that information was provided to the committee ahead of the media statement.
I also spoke with the chair of the committee when I was made aware that the public accounts committee were cross about the information being put out in the public. That discussion was most genuinely from me to say sorry, that I had not intended to cause the committee any offence and, indeed, that I would be more than happy to work with the committee to address any concerns that they had.
Again, I am very happy to be judged by my peers in this place. I am very confident that the steps I took were in accordance with the agenda that I am running as Chief Minister but also in accordance with the law. For Mr Smyth to feel that he was unable
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video