Page 775 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 13 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I might point out that I cannot recall any appointment made by members on that side of the chamber that has been successfully or even remotely challenged on the basis of their being a member of a political party. There was one retrospective attack on Mrs Carnell's appointment to the Board of Health in 1990, but members opposite choose to put to one side the fact that she was not at that point a member of the Liberal Party. Having appointed her, I had no idea that Mrs Carnell was a Liberal. That may surprise members opposite, but it is the truth. There was also some comment by Mr Connolly about appointing the wives of certain people, which I assume was a reference to the appointment of Mr Westende's wife to the board of ACTEW. There was no criticism about her appointment at the time it was made.
Mr Connolly: She is a very competent person, but I can imagine what you would say if we appointed - - -
MR HUMPHRIES: It was raised, presumably, to make some kind of point.
Mr Connolly: It is the sort of thing that you would raise. You imagine what would happen if we did that.
MR HUMPHRIES: If a member of this Government wanted to appoint his or her spouse to a board we would certainly have a lot to say about it, but that has not been the case in your Government; nor has it been the case in ours. With respect, little cheap shots like that can be dispensed with in this sort of debate. We have not refrained from criticising appointments that we have seen as being purely political appointments, where the person has been chosen principally because of his or her connection or friendship with the Australian Labor Party. I will refer to three such appointments - the appointment of Mr Williams to the board of ACTTAB, the appointment of Mr Wright as head of the Tourism Commission, and the attempted appointment of Mr Aliprandi as a member of the Pharmacy Board. We considered all those appointments inappropriate because we did not see the credentials of those people to hold those positions, and we will stand or fall on the strength of those appointments. If you catch us in government appointing people purely because they are members of the Liberal Party and you have us dead to rights, you can get us.
Mr Wood: You have never done that?
MR HUMPHRIES: We have not. Never. You tell us where it has happened, Mr Wood. I am open to interjections from Mr Wood on where we have made such appointments in the ACT.
Mr Wood: I will not embarrass the people.
MR HUMPHRIES: No, he will not embarrass us. Thank you very much. Mr Deputy Speaker, we believe that this Bill is very appropriate because it sets a standard with which I think the ACT can cope. I happen to think that review by parliamentary processes is not a bad thing. I must say that if ever I am an administrator in a government in the future I will be quite happy to see my appointment stand up to that kind of process, providing it is fair, and I believe that it will be a fair process under the Bill put forward by Mr Moore. If the process does become corrupted by politicians taking pot shots at
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .