Page 3084 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 17 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I believe that there are a number of valid criticisms in relation to the way in which some departments conduct their business which need to be addressed. That is the reason why the Estimates Committee exists. I believe that, in the main, the majority of this report reflects that. My concern rests with a number of issues, and I will come to those in a moment.
In the first instance I wish to address a number of the positives. In particular, I was extremely impressed with the level of information and the quickness and appropriateness of responses to inquiries from the committee by the Department of the Environment, Land and Planning, particularly in relation to budgetary matters. This report goes on quite properly to compliment that department in relation to the provision of its annual report. As in previous years, it was one of the first annual reports presented to the Assembly. I must dwell for some time on just how significant the responses were. When there were fairly technical questions in relation to budgetary allocations within that portfolio, and across agencies in that portfolio, they were handled without delay and with a great deal of integrity. "Forthright" would probably be the best word to use to describe the answers which came from the employees of that department.
I also wish to compliment the Technical and Further Education College. The TAFE College, in the production of its material to the Assembly, I believe, leads the way in the manner in which information should be supplied to the Estimates Committee. It was readily identifiable. It allowed for proper scrutiny of particular issues that the Estimates Committee had indicated that it was interested in. It addressed such questions as staffing, staffing numbers, capital works and other budgetary allocations, and it did so, as I have said, in a way for which they are to be congratulated.
Madam Speaker, I turn to what has become the focus of this report, and it is sad that that is the case. The way in which the chair conducted herself is not something that I would want to criticise and to put on the public record, because I do not believe that in the main there is anything which warrants that criticism. As a member of the Estimates Committee - bearing in mind that other than the executive members and you, Madam Speaker, we are all members of that committee - I believe that I have the right to say, for a particular reason, that the ultimate consideration of this significant report, into which all members on this side of the house had a significant input - I acknowledge that - as did members on that side of the house and one crossbencher in particular - - -
Mr Connolly: On both sides of the house.
MR LAMONT: The crossbenchers on both sides of the house. It is a shame that the feeling which permeated all of our considerations was rent asunder in the final consideration of this report. I have heard some of the criticism which has been levelled by Ms Szuty. We, in fact, were asked to provide additional comments and information. I received today the minutes of the Estimates Committee that I requested on the day after the meeting, and that was on the Thursday. I asked what the resolution was that was determined on the 5th. I was told that it said that any additional comments or other reports could be made available and presented and that they would be printed with the papers the next day; that we could not have the meeting the next day because we needed to have any additional comments through the computer system and presented to the Speaker prior to midnight on the 6th, when the committee ceased to exist.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .