Page 2694 - Week 09 - Thursday, 8 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
they need to. And I think that that really comes down to how members approach their role on the committees. Members have a choice as to how this operates. They can choose consensus or conflict. They can choose common ground or contest. And that really does come down to attitude. Each member in this place determines their own behaviour.
In the Greens we have a strong commitment to building consensus, working through issues, trying to find common ground and actually building up to a resolution to a matter that can actually reflect the different views of different people. The estimates committee is an interesting example of that. The estimates committee, if they had wanted to, could have found a series of areas in which they agreed. They could have produced a report together. Then there is the capacity for the various political blocs within those committees to produce their own additional comments. There is plenty of scope there for the estimates committee to do the job it is asked to.
Certainly the estimates committee had no constraints placed on it around the questions it could ask or on the witnesses that it could call. The estimates committee seemed to have a pretty free rein, from everything that I saw, and I have certainly not received any reports of constraints placed on the estimates committee other than Mr Hanson walking in and saying, “Here is the report. If you want to change it, you have to vote against it.”
In all the committees I have been on—and I admit that is not many because as the Speaker in the last Assembly I really only sat on admin and procedures and a couple of select committees—I have never seen a committee operate like that. Certainly from talking to colleagues, I have not heard any stories of committees operating like that.
But I think back to some of the committees that did operate last Assembly that I was on, the two select committees in particular that looked at contentious and difficult matters. One was around the costings process that was established for the election. Mr Barr, Mr Smyth and I sat on the committee. And I think coming into it, there were very significantly different views on how to come up with that piece of legislation. But what was able to be achieved through that committee was a piece of legislation where significant common ground was found.
I think the community has a right to expect members to work for the best outcome for the community. And the committees are an excellent place to do that. As the companion notes, they are meant to be a forum in a less formal atmosphere where considerable detailed work can be done. We often hear in the ACT members of the community, I guess, seeking out an approach where this Assembly might operate more like a local council. That is a much broader discussion and I do not think that we are likely to go down that path. But certainly committees are one place where this Assembly has the opportunity to operate like a local council, which is what the community so often seems to be asking for. It is an opportunity for members to work together, to work through issues in detail and to come up with a position.
That does not require agreement, and councils do not always agree. I am the first to acknowledge that. But what people on councils often do, from the councillors I speak to around the country—and the Greens are represented on many councils around the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video