Page 6246 - Week 19 - Tuesday, 17 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Collaery: Mr Speaker, I am speaking to the point of order at this stage; I have not addressed the amendment. I would have thought, of course, given the comments of the current Auditor-General, that the Government would be moved to support this amendment, because it could then say quite clearly that it is not attempting to exercise any control over the Auditor.
Mr Kaine: Drop the reports in a bucket of water; they are still hot.
Mr Collaery: Yes. I am not standing up to question the tactics of the Government. I think it is the same approach that it had on the amendments in respect of interpreters. Government members simply do not want to assist.
I agree with my colleague Mr Kaine: This act is different from that which I tried earlier on today. This is a miscellaneous clean-up piece of legislation before the house. It is different because, when you go to the Audit Act, you see really what the Audit Act is all about; it is an Act to "provide for the collection and payment of the public moneys, the audit of the public accounts and the protection and recovery of public property, and for other purposes". It is a broad Act, but it all goes back to accountability and it all goes back to the Auditor- General.
I am speaking only to the point of order. I believe that standing order 181, clearly, in this case requires the earnest attention of this Assembly, because we are talking about a separation of powers issue, and the Auditor-General, of course, has to examine all the points raised in this amendment Bill. If the Chief Minister is seeking to expand her discretions in this way, surely it behoves us to be interested in how the Auditor-General would examine those discretions. I will not labour the point, Mr Speaker. I think it is quite different from the one that was the subject of this morning's ruling.
Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, I must say that I think this matter could be resolved in a more appropriate way, and that is for Mr Collaery to move to suspend standing orders so that the Assembly could actually allow him to move his amendment - or to suspend standing order 181. In fact, I would be prepared to support that. But I do say that I feel that the issue is nowhere dealt with in this Bill and therefore the amendment is in contravention of standing order 181. That is certainly the way I read it, and I will be interested to hear your ruling. But there is another way of dealing with it, which would have been much more appropriate.
MR SPEAKER: I have quickly perused the Bill and the amendment and I believe that Mr Collaery's amendment is within the scope of the Bill, and that the role of the Auditor-General and his actions as they relate to this Bill are appropriately matters for amendment.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .