Page 2686 - Week 09 - Thursday, 8 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(2) the resolution of the Assembly of 27 November 2012 appointing members to committees be rescinded and nominations for membership of the revised committees be notified in writing to the Speaker within two sitting hours following conclusion of the debate on the matter.
I commend this motion to the Assembly. Ultimately, this is about making this place more effective and more efficient, and making this place function better. There has been a lot of discussion about the Assembly over the last six months. There are different views about what can be done. But there are two substantive issues, essentially: what size should the Assembly be post the next election and what can we do in the here and now to make this Assembly function as smoothly as it can, as effectively as it can and as efficiently as it can within its limited resources?
As members would be aware, I have tabled a bill that gives the power to this place to appoint a sixth minister, and I have encouraged the Chief Minister to do so. One of the concerns that the Chief Minister has raised, and one of the reasons why she has adjourned that legislation, is that at the moment her assertion is that her backbenchers are tied up in the standing committees of the Assembly. And to an extent there is some truth in that. Her four backbenchers are committed to a range of committees, with two non-executive government members on each of those committees.
What I see as a different issue from the Chief Minister, having written to her, is that the Chief Minister wants to deal with all of the matters together—the size of the Assembly, the size of the committees and the sixth minister—whereas I see that we can deal with some of the stuff that affects this Assembly without necessarily making decisions about forthcoming Assemblies.
I wrote to the Chief Minister and Mr Rattenbury on 28 May regarding this issue, and I thank the Chief Minister for her response. She appears to have a different position from me on this. However, we have had some useful, constructive conversations about this matter, and I thank her for her response. I am disappointed that, having written about three months ago to Mr Rattenbury, I have received no response or indication from him regarding his position on these matters. I do not think that is particularly helpful.
This matter to some extent has come about by virtue of the fact that in November, when the standing committees were established, having seen what was agreed to in the Greens-Labor parliamentary agreement and having had a number of discussions, which I was not involved in but which my predecessor was, the agreement essentially was that there would be an opposition majority on the PAC and JACS, with the Liberal Party having chairs of those, and the other committees would have a majority of government members.
That was the agreement that essentially came out of the Greens-Labor parliamentary agreement. We would have preferred to have more majorities on committees, as the non-government party here. I think that has some merit, because when you look at the role of committees in scrutinising government, having a majority of committees comprising government majorities is not good for good governance.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video