Page 4288 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 20 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
year. I have heard with interest the remarks made by Mr Connolly and, up until perhaps his last tirade, a lot of what he says, I think, has some weight. Certainly I would agree that Estimates Committee hearings are areas where Ministers, and you as Speaker, are examined and cross-examined to be made accountable for expenditure of government funds. That is appropriate and proper.
I think though, in reading through the transcript in relation to this Estimates Committee, there was probably a hell of a lot of so-called cross-examination and questioning which was really irrelevant and, indeed, just served to waste a lot of time - - -
Mr Duby: And public money.
MR STEFANIAK: And, effectively, public money. It behoves all members of the Assembly to ensure that questions are in fact relevant and to the point so that time and, indeed, public money are not wasted.
Ms Follett: Are you criticising your chairman?
MR STEFANIAK: No, I am not criticising the chairman. I am criticising the fact that a number of people at the Estimates Committee probably asked many questions that were irrelevant. That being said, I appreciated the chance to contribute during the formation of this report. I am not going to go over ground which the chairman, Mr Jensen, has gone over or, indeed, some of the areas gone over by Mr Connolly. I will just go through a couple of specific areas in this report. Before I do, I will mention one other criticism I have, not so much of what has been said here tonight - although I note that Mr Moore has yet to speak - but of some unfair comments made by certain members opposite in relation to travel by Mr Collaery and Mr Duby, and especially in relation to some minor amounts which they expended and had to give back, which they took in good faith and on good advice at the time from their public servants. I recall certain comments being made about how they should resign as Ministers in relation to some very minor amounts of money which, really, were taken by them, for all the best reasons, on advice from their public servants and in good faith. I think those comments were rather cheap and should not have been made.
Mr Connolly: It was not the Opposition. What did the Opposition say?
MR STEFANIAK: No, it may not have been. It might have been another member in this house, Mr Connolly; but I do not think those comments should have been made and I think they were rather cheap shots.
There are a couple of points which I will speak on in relation to this report. Firstly, at point 3.68, some very positive things did come to light. I am pleased to see that the report raised that matter and, indeed, during a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .