Page 3048 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 17 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Any lack of trust in the ACT public service by anybody is clearly an insult to the professionalism and the integrity, I would suggest, of those public servants, and I do not believe that it will be forgotten when the next election comes around. This Government's failure to expedite constituency inquiries - - -
Mr Lamont: Under Fightback there will not be any of them left.
MR CORNWELL: Madam Speaker, could you ask the dog over there to stop barking, please.
Government members: Oh!
MR CORNWELL: I withdraw. The Government's failure to expedite the constituency inquiries from non-government members, I believe, further shows a contempt for the electorate it purports to serve. I also believe that it brings the risk of political - - - (Extension of time granted) Madam Speaker, I venture to suggest that whoever introduced this clumsy and autocratic system does not even have the support of all the Ministers and their staff. I say this because I believe that there are reasonable Ministers - - -
Mr Berry: Thank you, Greg.
MR CORNWELL: I did not name them, Mr Berry - who within the constraints of these directions do provide the responses we seek. So too do their staff, notwithstanding that those staff are busy enough without taking aboard these simple constituency matters that under any rational government could be referred direct to the departments for attention.
I believe, as I have said, that the directive insults the integrity of people in the public service. I believe that it wastes the time of already busy ministerial staff. It slows down the response time of legitimate electoral inquiries. It obstructs non-government members in the performance of their duties. I believe that it introduces an eavesdropping approach to political service to the electorate that I personally find repugnant. Further, it serves no useful purpose. What possible value to the Government - even to the smiling Mr Berry - is there in knowing that I made a housing inquiry on behalf of a constituent? Or that Mr Moore asked about bus timetabling alterations? Or that Mrs Carnell sought progress information on a nursing home application? For heaven's sake, there is no advantage or benefit to the Government at all - not even idle curiosity, I submit - in knowing about such matters, the answers to which should be available to all.
I will now acknowledge an earlier interjection by Mr Berry, who said, "Well, the Opposition, the non-government members, get the same service as the public". That is just the point: We do not. This is another argument against these absurd directives. They do not apply to the public. We therefore have the ludicrous situation that an elected representative must direct all electoral matters to a department through the relevant Minister, but a constituent can approach the department direct.
Mr Humphries: It is bizarre.
MR CORNWELL: It is quite bizarre, Mr Humphries. Perhaps the non-government members should be flattered that the Government views us as such dangerous opponents that we must all be kept in isolation in case we seduce or suborn the public servants to whom we are speaking. If so, Chief Minister,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .