Page 3103 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 15 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DE DOMENICO: No, I did not. As the Chief Minister has factored in $17m, how many public servants and in what areas?
MS FOLLETT: In making available to the administration a voluntary separation scheme, I do not have a target figure in mind. The fact is that those voluntary separations will be agreed to by management only if they will result in savings in the costs of the administration. Nevertheless, as I am sure members are aware if they have had a look at the budget papers, the full $17m, on the average pay-out on redundancy, would accommodate some 400 or 500 people taking redundancy.
I say again that that is not a target figure. It may well be that either that number of people do not express an interest in voluntary separation or management does not believe that that number of separations will result in savings in future years. So the $17m is a fixed maximum, if you like; but, if the separations fall well below that, then the money is simply returned to the Consolidated Fund. The redundancies, the voluntary separations, depend upon there being a return in future years, an actual saving in future years.
Adoption Act - Gazettal
MR MOORE: My question is directed to Mr Connolly as Attorney-General. It requires a little bit of background, in accordance with standing orders. During the debate on the Adoption Bill you were vehement in your attack on the non-government members of the Assembly for delaying the Adoption Bill. You in turn assured this Assembly, both on 8 December 1992 and again on 23 March 1993, that this Bill would be operational in a matter of weeks. I quote the Minister in response to my speech, where I identified that the Assembly was not talking about the gazettal of the title or commencement provisions but the substance of the Bill. You said:
The word "scurrilous" was bandied about. Mr Moore, when this Bill is finally passed by this Assembly we will have it up and running within two to three weeks ...
The gazettal of the commencement provisions of the Adoption Act was on 2 April 1993, and this part is not relevant to the debate. We clarified that in the debate. However, the substantive part of the Act was not put into operation until the gazettal on 31 July 1993 - some four months after this Assembly passed the Bill - and you told us that it would be only a matter of weeks. In addition, to make matters worse, on 29 June you signed a notice of commencement for the substantive Act to take effect on 31 July - more than a matter of weeks at that stage. Can the Minister explain why it is that he did not approach the Assembly to explain why he was not able to keep his commitment, or perhaps he would prefer to explain why he considers that he has not misled the Assembly - unless, of course, that is exactly what he has done?
MR CONNOLLY: If I were Mr Moore, I would not remind community groups about the adoption debate. The fact of the matter is that within weeks of the Assembly debate we had the office up and running and accepting applications, for people who were interested in seeking applications. Many members of the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .