Page 1588 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 19 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
morbidity data from Woden Valley Hospital. It was explained to me that Woden Valley, unfortunately, does not have that data or that because of the form in which it does have it, it would be exceedingly difficult to produce and would take a very large amount of time to produce. Obviously, I accepted that. I do not accept that we do not have morbidity data, but I accepted the view that I should not expect public servants to be taken away from their jobs for a prolonged period to produce some data that I was just interested in. That is an appropriate approach, and it is the sort of approach that all of my colleagues would take in this sort of situation.
When this motion was drafted it was regularly taking well in excess of three months for my questions to be answered - in fact, just about any of my questions to be answered. A rough estimate was taken at that time that showed that the average length of time for questions to remain unanswered was four months. Mr Cornwell has alluded to a question about community consultation that took seven months to answer. Mr Kaine, I think, had a question to the Minister for Sport on government appointments that took some eight months, I think, to answer. Mr De Domenico had a question on the Canberra map that was asked on 21 May 1992 and was answered on 22 March 1993.
Mr De Domenico: Nearly a year.
MRS CARNELL: Yes, nearly a year - 10 months later. Mr Berry made the comment that a lot of the questions that we have a problem with are exceedingly detailed. I refer to our current notice paper and a question that I have on the notice paper from 16 February. That is three months. That question is very simple. It asks how many beds were closed at Woden Valley Hospital and Calvary for the Christmas shutdown? What was the major purpose of that shutdown? What were the dates of the shutdown? The question goes on. It is to the point and a factual question; yet it has been three months awaiting an answer. Quite honestly, I think the Opposition has every reason to be dissatisfied with that approach.
Ms Szuty made a very important comment when she said that a lot of the questions that we put on the notice paper are there to get information for our constituents. We need to be able to give that information in a timeframe that is acceptable to those people, the people of Canberra, the people who vote, the people who have a right to get information. If we can tell them, "Yes, we will ask that question", and, "Yes, we will have it back within 30 days", we will be able to look after those people substantially better than we can now. I think Ms Szuty was quite right when she made those comments. We also have to look at the fact that questions on notice are a very legitimate way of obtaining information that members cannot otherwise access, particularly, may I say, from Mr Berry, who seems to have a very large problem with providing briefings.
Mr Berry: No trouble at all.
MRS CARNELL: Say that again. No trouble at all in a timeframe, like the February letter that I sent you asking for a briefing! It might actually happen one day.
Mr Berry: A briefing about what?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .