Page 3923 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 15 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I submit; a precaution that this Assembly ought to impose. If it does not, it is derelict in its duty and it is setting up the very conditions that can lead to exactly the same outcomes as we have experienced in Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia. There is nothing sinister in this - nothing sinister at all. It is merely saying to the Housing Commissioner, "You have an approval to go and borrow money to do these things, but the Treasurer sets the limit that you can borrow to". If anybody in this room is going to tell me that that is an unreasonable prescription to put on any manager, I would be interested to see on what basis they put that proposition. It is a totally reasonable proposition that a Minister should set the limit. We are not talking here about $500,000 or $1.5m. The Minister argued before that it is chickenfeed; it is only $1.5m. We are not talking about $1.5m now.
By Mr Connolly's own figures we are talking about $19m this year, although I am not clear from what he said that that is in fact the limit. He said that it would be supplemented by $19m, I think; so what is the total limit imposed? I do not think that document tells him and it does not tell me. We are talking about a very significant sum of money. Through the Speaker, I am addressing you, Mr - what is your name again?
Mr Lamont: I hope that I have this much fun at Christmas.
MR KAINE: You will not have half as much fun. I have been diverted. I was making a strong point there, Madam Speaker, and he destroyed my concentration.
Mr Connolly: You reiterate whatever it is you were going to say, Mr Kaine.
MR KAINE: I know exactly what I was going to say and in fact I had already said it. I will say it again; it is the responsibility of this Assembly to place accountability requirements and constraints on the actions of Ministers and to impose such constraints on managers through their Minister. It is eminently reasonable that we place a constraint on this occasion. Despite Mr Connolly's rhetoric, I think that the reasonable members of this Assembly will be convinced by my argument.
MR MOORE (9.40): We have had the arguments put by the Minister and the arguments put by the Opposition. Once again I am in that awkward position of having only just seen this amendment. In the Minister's response he basically said that the amendment is superfluous. When I refer back to page 3, clause 7, proposed new subsection 18(2), I see these words:
On the day on which this section commences, the Treasurer shall establish the following trust accounts under subsection (2) of section 85 of the Audit Act: ...
The account that we are dealing with is then mentioned. That is my reading of this amendment to the Housing Assistance Act. It seems to me that the Treasurer still has the responsibility. At this stage I am not convinced that what you are doing is going to add anything. On the other hand, I also do not see that it is going to do any harm having it in there. It is, perhaps, providing an extra safeguard in setting a tone about loans. Whether it is necessary or not is the question I would like the Minister to address. What harm is this going to do and how does it change what actually happens? Does it provide some administrative awkwardness or does it clarify a position that is already there?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .