Page 1044 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 6 May 2014

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


Public Accounts—Standing Committee

Report 5

MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (10.49): I present the following report:

Public Accounts—Standing Committee—Report 5—Inquiry into Appropriation Bill 2013-14 (No. 2) and Appropriation (Office of the Legislative Assembly) Bill 2013-14 (No. 2), dated 5 May 2014, together with a copy of the extracts of the relevant minutes of proceedings.

I move:

That the report be noted.

Let me begin by thanking my colleagues and particularly the secretary of the committee, Dr Cullen, for enabling us to prepare and table this today so that the government, should it so wish in the next couple of weeks, can bring the bill back on for debate.

The committee had a number of hearings. We saw all five ministers and have delivered a report with 18 recommendations. The recommendations go mainly to procedure. Let me start by saying there were some lighter minutes in the committee. At one stage Dr Bourke, doing his best to bolster the government, asked Minister Rattenbury about the Alexander Maconochie Centre. He said:

Minister, can you tell us why this work is necessary?

Mr Rattenbury started by saying:

Yes. What we have seen is a situation—

To which I then interjected, probably being a bit disorderly, and said:

Because Simon screwed up.

The committee all had a chuckle—

MADAM SPEAKER: That is unparliamentary, Mr Smyth. It was unparliamentary in the minutes, and it is unparliamentary in this place.

MR SMYTH: I do apologise, Madam Speaker. But it highlights the fact that we spend so much time coming back here to clean up the mistakes, particularly of Minister Corbell. A number of the recommendations are aimed at the delivery of capital works and the fact that this government has a poor record on the delivery of capital works.

There were a number of questions taken on notice and some supplementary questions provided. So recommendation 1 goes to that. The committee still expects those to be answered and believes they should be answered prior to the debate on the supplementary appropriation bills.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video