Page 3374 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 24 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
be necessary; but, if it is, that is because negotiations have not been particularly productive or have not been undertaken on a realistic basis. I think that this provision will avoid many of those circumstances and again strengthen the integrity of the process that we are talking about.
MR MOORE (9.11): Madam Speaker, in supporting this, and without reflecting on the previous vote, I should point out that part of that consultation, of course, would be to ask the Chief Minister whether the person has been a member of a political party, and the range of questions which to a certain extent cover the quite sensible concerns of Mr Humphries on the previous issue that was dealt with in the Assembly. Therefore, I am delighted to support this amendment.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (9.11): As I intimated earlier, the Government will be supporting this amendment. I think it is a sensible precaution. It is not an arrangement to which I am a total stranger. I think that it gets over a lot of problems that Mr Humphries outlined in speaking to his earlier amendment; so, as I say, Madam Speaker, the Government will support it. I draw your attention to the numbering, Madam Speaker. I am not sure whether we need to formally amend the numbering or whether that is picked up in the printing process.
MADAM SPEAKER: I believe that it will be a consequential amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
MR MOORE (9.12): Madam Speaker, I move:
Page 3, line 33, add the following subclause:
"(4) An instrument of appointment is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 10 of the Subordinate Laws Act 1989.".
My amendment is simply to make the appointment of the chairperson an instrument disallowable under section 10 of the Subordinate Laws Act 1989. The reason for it is to ensure that, if the consultation process outlined by Mr Humphries - the process that we have just amended in this clause - does not work, members have the opportunity for the first 15 sitting days after an appointment is made to move disallowance. The process there is that, if the matter is not debated, then, after a further 15 sitting days, the appointment is disallowed. Other than that, it comes to the Assembly for debate and the issues of conflict can be brought out into the open. Should there be a minority government, as we have now, it may well be the case that the appointment is overturned. I think this puts an appropriate system of safeguards into place.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (9.14): As I said before, the Government will be supporting Mr Moore's amendment to make these appointments disallowable instruments. I think this is the appropriate approach for scrutiny of the appointments, Madam Speaker. I think that it is a much better approach to have this arrangement of scrutiny by the Assembly, and disallowance by the Assembly, rather than a process of elimination or of trying to define a large range of people. I think that Mr Moore's amendment does provide for adequate scrutiny and also, of course, by bringing the question back into this Assembly, there is an appropriate role for the ACT parliament. This is a more accountable process than perhaps we might have considered before.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .