Page 899 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 27 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
recommendations put forward by this committee is patently absurd, and is itself a refutation of the imputation by the Leader of the Opposition that somehow or other I personally or the Government are imposing our will on these committees.
Although the report does not bring out the things that I would have desired, I have no intention of rejecting or opposing the recommendations if it is the wish of this Assembly that they be adopted. These are the Assembly's committees and I hope that the Assembly will see this proposal for what it is, and that is a genuine attempt to restructure our committees to meet the needs of this Assembly in a form appropriate to the present breakup between the Government and the Opposition.
In terms of the expressed concern of the Labor Opposition about this matter, I would put it on record that for the last hour and 15 minutes of this debate, Ms Follett, Mr Whalan and Mr Berry have been absent from the floor of the house. They are so concerned about this matter, that they could not be here during at least the hour and a quarter of the debate that has taken place on the matter. I really do have to raise the question of just how serious they are. Perhaps they are simply trying to justify their abstaining from doing any of the work that these committees have done, and to justify their leaving Mr Wood to continue to carry the burden.
This notion that somehow these committees are creatures of the Government has to be put to rest. They are committees of the Assembly. The fact that one of my Executive Deputies happens to sit on one or more of them is totally irrelevant, and it does not make it anything else but an Assembly committee. In fact, and I think Mr Stefaniak referred to this earlier, I would have thought that to have an Executive Deputy, who, because of the position occupied has got a special knowledge about the matter that the committee has considered, would have been considered by the committee to be an advantage rather than as something insidious and undesirable.
To go further, if the committee itself determines - and it is the committee itself that determines - that one of my Executive Deputies ought to be the chairman, or the chairperson, why should any member of the Opposition complain? It is not that the Government is imposing its will, the committee itself is making a determination about who its chairman will be. For the Leader of the Opposition to assert that they will not serve on any committee where the committee itself determines that an Executive Deputy will be chairman, says more about their intent in connection with these committees than the intent of the Government. I find it reprehensible.
In the few short moments that the Leader of the Opposition was here in this debate and spoke in connection with it, she implied somehow that the Government is operating behind
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .