Page 917 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 25 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
great detail, not in any great authoritative and definitive fashion, approximately how much it costs to provide the services of the legislation each year and, alternatively, how much money is raised from it each year, so that the Assembly and the public can assess whether a linking up of the two has occurred and whether the user pays principle is being applied or whether the Government is generally using such provision to raise additional revenue without telling people.
MR WHALAN (Minister for Industry, Employment and Education) (9.55): Mr Speaker, I would like to take the Assembly back to the previous amendment which was adopted, and that related to the question of reporting. In discussions with Mr Moore earlier, he indicated that it was his intention to ensure, wherever possible, that every piece of legislation incorporated a section which provided for reporting and that this was part of the process of open government. We in the Government probably could not object to the principle that underlies that sort of approach, but we would dispute the practicality of it.
There is a certain relevance to this proposal, as there was to that previous one, because one wonders whether, if we are to include this sort of provision in this piece of legislation, we are to do it in relation to every other piece of legislation which comes before the Assembly or, indeed, which is amended through the Assembly in the course of its business.
What clearly is the intention of the Government in relation to these sorts of charges? There is no intention by this Government to levy charges under this legislation to do more than recover the costs of implementing its provisions. To suggest that this sort of legislation would be used as a general revenue measure is quite bizarre. These charges fall into the category of a series of charges which applies in a whole range of legislation.
So the amendment is opposed as a matter of principle. It effectively hypothecates revenue raised under the Bill to cover expenses incurred in its operations. As I said, such an approach could be applied to any amount of legislation and thus would constrain governments in the way they apply their revenue. This would be completely unacceptable, and for that reason the amendment cannot be agreed to.
MR COLLAERY (9.57): Mr Speaker, the Residents Rally supports the amendment proposed, on the basis that it adds to open government. The Rally believes that the provisions of this amendment will enforce upon a Minister before he or she imposes a cost, and upon his or her advisers, the intellectual exercise of ensuring that it will not cost more to collect a fee, as we saw with the preschool fee, than it would to impose it or vice versa.
Mr Speaker, the Rally interprets broadly the wording of paragraph (a) of subclause (2), "a document itemising each
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .