Page 3194 - Week 11 - Thursday, 13 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This debate is about the report on the independent committee against corruption; it is not about the current inquiries of the committee, and he should stick to the issue before the Assembly.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Berry. Please proceed to the point, Mr Jensen.
MR JENSEN: Mr Speaker, I think I have made my point in relation to that - that Mr Wood's concerns in relation to possible political problems with the committees have in fact been taken up by his leader. I think I will leave it at that. I think everybody knows what I am talking about.
I can assure members that, as chairman of the committee, I have taken great care to keep my own views to myself, despite requests to comment by the media, until reports are presented to this Assembly. I will continue to maintain this position, particularly in relation to having been requested to comment on some of the statements by Ms Follett in relation to the current inquiry concerning the Priorities Review Board. But I think that is enough said on that matter.
Now that I have got that off my chest, I would like to comment on the report and the responses by the Chief Minister on behalf of the Alliance Government. I am pleased to see that the Government has effectively accepted this report. It is also pleasing to note that it was a unanimous report. In line with the recommendations of the report, I agree that a part-time independent committee is the most appropriate body for the ACT at this time. It is my hope also that such a committee will provide a deterrent effect to the possibility of official and bureaucratic corruption, because there will now be an independent committee to ensure that any complaints are properly and fully investigated. It is obviously essential to ensure that the community can have complete confidence in the impartiality of that committee.
Another key recommendation of the committee report was recommendation No. 23, which provides a sunset provision requiring the legislation to provide for a review of the committee and its operations after two years. This is an eminently sensible recommendation and one that probably should be included in all legislation that sets up statutory committees of this type.
Let me also say that I have no problems with the two changes to the recommendations proposed by the Government. Both recommendations ensure that action can be taken to protect any evidence that may be available to the investigators. While I originally supported the proposal that people being investigated should be advised of the investigation, I accept the Government's proposition that in cases of official corruption there is considerable
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .