Page 5185 - Week 17 - Thursday, 13 December 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
on access and equity and on excellence. So be it; but at this stage it is the view of the Minister responsible that he should accept the proposition put by Mr Moore, and we on this side of the house agree.
MR MOORE (12.40): Mr Speaker, I am delighted that my proposition has been accepted by the Government. I am particularly delighted because what Mr Berry calls a stupid policy was, in fact, drafted originally by me, and, in fact, I am quite proud of it. What surprises me is the hypocrisy of Mr Berry to stand up there like that and get stuck into this notion of an honorary health board when, in fact, the policy of the Labor Party is not to have boards at all but to have advisory committees - and no-one has ever suggested that there should be any remuneration for those advisory committees.
So what we get from the Labor Party here is gross hypocrisy. It is just a case of using the opportunity to get stuck into the Government when they happen to have made a reasonable decision. There is a difference in approach between the Labor Party and the Rally, of course, and the Alliance, on whether or not we should have boards, and I accept that. However, at no stage has the alternative proposal that Labor has put suggested that there ought be remuneration. If they had in their time provided remuneration for any of their advisory committees, they would have a leg to stand on; but, in fact, they have none.
What we heard from Mr Berry was an emotive speech. He repeated the word "stupidity" again and again, and the only thing the word applies to is the Labor Party itself when it was in government. A sensible decision has been taken by the Alliance, and they are not going to set a precedent of providing remuneration for board members. We heard Dr Kinloch stand up a little while ago and basically imply that he would like to see remuneration provided to another body. Where would it stop after that? That is the question. Before we know it, we will be in a position where everybody in the community feels that if they are going to offer some community service they should line up in order to hook into a little bit of remuneration - and that is the wrong motivation.
What we have at the moment, and what is delightful about Canberra, is hundreds and hundreds of people who are prepared to give their time and make a contribution to the community. That is to be welcomed and they are to be honoured for that. My proposition leaves in subclause 18(1), which provides for out-of-pocket expenses, and I think the particular case that Dr Kinloch draws attention to reaffirms why it is necessary that that clause be there. So, to have the sort of statement made by Mr Berry is totally inappropriate.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .