Page 828 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We should also therefore say that, because of the small size of our committees, where a chair wishes to make additional comments they should do so in the additional comments or dissenting report section of committee reports. If you wish to do it in that way, that is fine. I do not think that has been a precedent; in fact, the Speaker made it very clear that the precedent has been set in terms of the chair writing their own preface. I believe that the motion put by Mr Lamont to include those additional comments to what I perceive as additional comments is not appropriate. There are other ways to achieve the same goal. But, having heard Mrs Carnell's perspective on it and the fact that she would be willing to support that motion, and I presume that her Liberal colleagues have the same view, I will do what I can to assist in recognising the will of the Assembly.
MS SZUTY (11.21): Madam Speaker, I intend to speak very briefly to this issue. The role of the preface to a committee report, as Mr Moore has outlined this morning, is certainly an interesting one. It is useful to go back over the history of committee reports to see the various prefaces that have been included by the chair of the committee. I must say that it is not something I have done as chair of the Estimates Committee, but I have been interested to listen to the debate this morning.
Had I been the chair of the Select Committee on Euthanasia, I do not know that I would have done what Mr Moore has done in terms of the preface that was included in the committee's report. However, I do take his point that the additional comments Mr Lamont wishes to add to the report are additional comments to additional comments. I agree with Mr Moore that that would be a very unfortunate precedent for this Assembly to set, if the motion Mr Lamont proposes is carried today. I agree with Mr Moore that the issue needs clarification, and I think his solution, for the preface to be considered as part of the report and then for additional comments to be made by other members of the committee, is an appropriate solution and is worthy of further consideration. I will be opposing the motion proposed by Mr Lamont.
MR BERRY (11.23): This debate is somewhat timely for me because soon I will be putting my shoulder to the wheel, so to speak, in the committee process. I have to say that the preface in this report is largely political, and one would expect dissenting remarks - that is, after all, what they are - to include some political statement from time to time. That is the nature of this business. But I think it is a bit shabby for the chair of a committee not to give other members of the committee what could be considered a fair go in addressing some of the issues in the report. I take it that the preface to a report can be seen to be part of the report. That is the way people would read them. Once Mr Moore recognised what the numbers were, I heard some remarks in his speech which seemed to me to be a bit like an act of contrition.
I do not see anything wrong with the in-principle position of a preface by the chair. These committees operate on the basis of consensus in many respects, but from time to time there are differences which will warrant differing comments by different committee members. I say to members I will be bumping into in the course of my committee work that I will be trying to make sure that everybody has a fair go. I would be objecting to this sort of approach; but, at the same time, if I were the chair I would also take the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .