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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2018 Week 07 Hansard (Wednesday, 1 August 2018) . . Page.. 2562 ..

the ACT’s accountability mechanisms and offices work together to cover all areas without overlapping too much, thereby creating additional work for those offices, the committee recommended that the PID legislation be reviewed. I will read from the relevant section of the integrity commission committee report:

18.22 The Committee is of the view that the operations of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2012 (the PID Act) as it concerns any future ACT ACIC should be reviewed.

18.23 The Committee notes that there appeared to be no provision for a statutory review period in the PID Act which became effective 1 February 2013. Generally, statutory review periods are designed to ensure a timely evaluation of the implementation and performance against the legislation. Some statutes prescribe review periods that can range from between three to five years.

18.24 Accordingly, as the PID Act will have been operational for five years on 1 February 2018, the Committee considers that statutory review of its implementation will be timely.

The committee then went on to recommend that such a review take place. Given that introducing an integrity commission to the ACT will increase accountability and oversight mechanisms for the territory, it is important we look into these issues. The committee made a number of findings, and one was a statutory review of the act, which the government agreed to in its response to the committee. I believe this review will cover the issues Miss Burch has raised in her motion. On that basis, having reflected on the main points from her motion, I will be supporting Mr Barr’s amendment, as I think that covers those points quite thoroughly.

MRS KIKKERT (Ginninderra) (5.04): I thank Miss Burch for bringing this motion before the Assembly today, and I wish to say a few words in support. On the matter of transparency and integrity I hope my record is clear. On many occasions I have stood in this chamber and called on this government to support transparency and integrity in many forms. I have spoken, as I did again yesterday, in favour of making important government decisions subject to external merits review. I have spoken in favour of real versus sham community consultation. I have called for accountability in decision-making. I have called on the Labor-Greens government, as I did earlier today, to provide the residents of this community with candid and detailed reporting on its public commitments to culturally and linguistically diverse Canberrans.

I suspect we all know intuitively that transparency and integrity are essential elements of good government. As Chris Field, the Ombudsman for Western Australia, has pointed out:

… there is a very strong correlation between prosperity, the rule of law, democratic institutions, respect for economic and personal freedoms and good governance hallmarked by accountability and transparency.

Unfortunately, as we saw with the Canberra resident who raised concerns about the territory’s youth justice facility last year, things are often difficult for those who

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