Page 663 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 20 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Western Australia has five members on the board, two of whom must be from the industry, and the legislation gives the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia a right to appoint the representatives. In the Northern Territory, the board comprises five, two of whom are industry members. The legislation of the Northern Territory specifies that the Real Estate Institute of that Territory shall submit a panel of names to the Minister who then appoints.
So, as you can see, Madam Speaker, what we are putting forward today is virtually what happens in other parts. I put forward the amendments, by the way, because the Liberal Party and the industry had concerns about what would happen to any remaining funds. When the Chief Minister introduced the Bill she said:
Any remaining funds will, subject to ministerial approval of the amount, be made available for educational programs relating to real estate matters for agents and members of the public and to enable or assist persons to acquire or rent residential premises.
There is no problem with that. If we were assured that the people on the board were representative of the industry itself - that is merely what the amendments are doing - I feel sure that we would not continue to have the concerns that we have now. For all those reasons, Madam Speaker, I suggest that the amendments be accepted.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (3.48): Madam Speaker, the Government will be opposing Mr De Domenico's proposed amendments. In doing so, I should note that the proposals that have been put forward by Mr De Domenico were put to me by the Real Estate Institute at some point last year. I rejected them at that time, and I will reject them again. It is an indication of the amount of consultation that has gone on with the industry in the preparation of this Bill.
Madam Speaker, I have a number of reasons for rejecting Mr De Domenico's amendments, although I accept that he is putting them forward in good faith and in keeping with the wishes of the Real Estate Institute of the ACT. My principal reason for rejecting them is that they constrain the Minister's capacity to make appointments to this board, and they do so in a way that is at least as stringent as the most stringent of the other States.
If this Assembly wishes to consider the question of constraint upon Ministers in the appointment to boards, that is an issue that has application to the whole of government, and to single out this one piece of legislation to make such an amendment is really the wrong way of going about it. I believe that Ministers have the right to make appointments and really should not be constrained in this way, as a general principle. There are plenty of opportunities for members of this Assembly to criticise any appointments that are made, and they have been taken up. At the end of the day it is my belief that people who are appointed to boards, such as the Agents Board, are appointed for the good of the community rather than in order to represent specifically their own particular interest group. So, I do not favour, in general terms, a representational style of appointment to boards. I would also like to say, Madam Speaker, that the Government and the Minister will, of course, continue to consult with the industry on such appointments.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .