Page 774 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 13 April 1994

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


Mr Connolly even described last night's affair as proof of the principle that the buck stops with the Minister. I point out that every member of the Government voted against the motion that was moved last night and had there been nine members of the Government it would not have succeeded. So it is not proof of the principle that the buck stops with the Minister; quite the contrary. As far as you people are concerned, it is proof that the Minister should be able to shuffle off responsibility to somebody else.

Madam Speaker, Mr Connolly made the point that he does not expect to see a landslide of support from other States for the principles that are being enunciated here. One Minister opposite - I cannot think who it is at the moment - is often heard to say that the ACT leads the way in respect of certain things that it does. It leads the way in its treatment of environmental matters; it leads the way in all sorts of other areas. I cannot think which Minister it is, but I think that Minister should talk to Mr Connolly, because there is obviously a different point of view coming forward from the Government benches on the matter.

Mr Connolly: Our ideas usually are leading the way. It is these other ones that cause a few problems.

MR HUMPHRIES: I see. When you do it you are leading the way. When we do it, or the Independents do it, it is a step back into the Dark Ages.

Mr De Domenico: He has a monopoly on good ideas.

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes.

Mr Kaine: He has just taken on the mantle of Health Minister, after all. He has to perpetuate this - - -

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes. Who will inherit Mr Berry's mantle? That is a very good question. Madam Speaker, I must make it very clear that there is a great difference, an enormous difference, between the demonstrated policies of the Liberal and Labor parties when it comes to appointments to statutory offices. Let me make it clear, first of all, that we are not opposed, and never have been opposed, to the concept of appointing people to statutory authorities merely on the basis of their membership of a political party, or that criterion at least being a factor. We have never said that people who belong to political parties should not be members of statutory authorities or hold statutory appointments.

The Government of which I was a member, the Government of Mr Kaine, made such appointments. The difference between our approach and the approach pursued by the Labor Party is that we have always strictly made appointments based on merit - the most appropriate person for the job. Whether that person belonged to the Liberal Party or to the Labor Party, we made that appointment. Our Government appointed members of the Australian Labor Party to statutory offices when we believed that they were the most appropriate people. We also appointed people of our own party when we felt that it was an appropriate appointment.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .