Page 3416 - Week 08 - Thursday, 23 August 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
government has actually taken on board some of the suggestions of previous estimates committees and public accounts committees—that is, funding to the Auditor-General be extended, given that it provides good advice and, indeed, probably in the longer term saves the territory money.
I commend the provision of additional funds for the audit office to undertake more performance audits. I have been seeking these additional funds for many years. PAC has supported these demands for additional funds, and the value of independent performance has been shown time and time again, not only in the ACT but in other jurisdictions in Australia and elsewhere.
I think the sign of a good audit office in any jurisdiction typically is the response of the government to its reports on performance audit in particular. In the case of the ACT, of course, we have had the history of the vigorous, even antagonistic, reaction from former Chief Minister Mr Stanhope to some of the reports that were signed off by former Auditor-General Tu Pham. I think that shows that the audit reports were probably pretty close to the mark. The audit office performs an incredibly valuable role both for the Assembly and for the community, and I look forward to seeing the continued sound reports of the performance audits.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Minister for Health and Minister for Territory and Municipal Services) (4.15): The government has agreed to increase funding to the Auditor-General’s office by $1 million across the forward estimates. This is in recognition of the very important role the Auditor-General’s Office plays. I also draw members’ attention, though, to the fact that the decision the government has taken over the years has been to exempt the audit office from savings that have been sought across government. Indeed, in the 2006-07 budget we also increased funding to the Auditor-General to increase performance audits at that time.
Our record in government is clear. We have consistently increased funding to the audit office, and this is in recognition of the very important role the audit office plays. As the minister responsible, I am pleased I have been able to find some additional money in what was a very tight budget.
Proposed expenditure agreed to.
Proposed expenditure—Part 1.3—Chief Minister and Cabinet Directorate—$36,919,000 (net cost of outputs) and $2,946,000 (capital injection), totalling $39,865,000.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mrs Dunne): Would it help members if I highlight at the beginning of each part the time set aside for that part? The time agreed to for this part is 45 minutes.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (4.17): I want to address some of the issues that I think are really set from the top. These are not just Treasury issues; these are issues of leadership for the head of government and are around the cost of living.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video