Page 3111 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 12 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
But I suspect that today we are not simply arguing the case for an inquiry by the Social Policy Committee. I believe we are arguing that any such inquiry should be by that committee, and not by what seems to have been flagged as an independent inquiry. So let me tell you about the status or, I think, the respect that this chamber has for its committee system. I would assert that it is the committee system that ought to be doing this work, and not some outside inquiry. I believe that all members have a respect for the committee system, and they value the work it does.
Mr Collaery: Used to have.
MR WOOD: If you could get a committee off the ground, you would change your mind. The committee system has been respected by members, and I would say that that is the system as a whole. I am proud to say - and I think I am entitled to say - that the Social Policy Committee shares that respect. I could quote the Chief Minister some month or two ago when he paid a high compliment following our report on the needs of the ageing.
I recognise that that was a non-contentious report, but look at the inquiry we carried out into public behaviour that did have potential for political point scoring, or for some partisan views to be adopted, and yet it did not. That was a sound and steady inquiry into controversial matters and the committee - that is, its members - acted responsibly. Any problems were avoided because, I suppose, of the professional nature of the membership of that committee. No-one sought any advantage that may have come out of it, because the referral to the committee came as a result of some fairly heated debate in this chamber.
So I am defending today the right of this Assembly to assert that any inquiry should be done by a committee of the Assembly. It would have, I believe, much greater powers, better powers, to seek all the information that is required. The powers of the committees, as we well know, are quite strong, and they would cover any eventuality that might be met.
But then look at the alternatives. This Government recently commissioned, and recently tabled, a report of the Priorities Review Board. Now, it seems to me that, in the budget yesterday, this document which was to be a lighthouse for Government action has already been discarded. It seems already to be saying that this report which was a report of an independent inquiry has no worth. I do not see where, in any of the budget papers, it has a high profile, or indeed, any profile at all. Not only that, but the report of the Priorities Review Board was flawed, and, most significantly, it was more greatly flawed in the areas where it commented on education. Now no doubt the Government, if it goes down the path of an independent inquiry, would not reconstitute the Priorities Review Board, but it does not lead me to have a great deal of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .