Page 643 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 4 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the support of all members of this Assembly and the bulk of our electorate. Yet we are in a situation where this Assembly is unable to act upon its own recommendations, but instead has to go cap in hand to the Commonwealth. This is a situation which I find incomprehensible - a situation which I might point out did not apply even in 1854 when the colony of Victoria was granted self-government from New South Wales, but one that does occur in 1989 as in our case.
Other matters referred to in this motion are the size and structure of the Legislative Assembly and the size of the Executive itself. Because of the broad range of duties and responsibilities associated with the State and municipal-style government that has been foisted on the people of the ACT, 17 elected members cannot give in-depth consideration to all matters placed before them. Therefore, an increase in the number of members can be argued for.
However, because of the economic restraint necessary, the wages bill is an obstacle to achieving this ideal. As a generalisation the public resents paying the wages for its political representatives. Therefore, provided the Assembly attempts to manage with the minimum number of members which is recognised as acceptable to conduct the business before the Assembly, public criticism will be minimised.
One possible solution to accommodate both the preceding points of view is that a standing committee be established which comprises Assembly members and unpaid elected councillors, which committee would form a municipal council and then deal with such matters. Is such a proposal desirable or acceptable? That is just one of the many questions before us.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in regard to the size of the Executive, the Act limits the Executive to a Chief Minister plus three Ministers. One imagines that the intentions of those responsible for drafting the Act was that each Minister would nominate one or more deputies to assist with the workload. However, in our situation, with small party groupings, as long as the Government members insist on working along party lines instead of collegiate-style government the appointment of deputies is unlikely and therefore the workload for the Executive will be excessive.
Because of this workload the Ministers may be unable to gain the depth of knowledge and insight required for each facet of their portfolio. Therefore, the potential exists for them to become the rubber stamp of the public servants for whom they work. Perhaps a recognised system of junior Ministers or deputies is desirable to assist the Ministers in their tasks.
An alternative may be that the size of the Executive be increased. To what number? Any number of computations and variations are possible. However, the committee of inquiry
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .