Page 1924 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 14 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, some of the same arguments can also be applied, although not to the same extent, to the Director of Public Prosecutions. The most important thing in these cases is that there is a critical perception, and it is a perception that we must ensure does not become part of the thinking of people in the ACT. As we in politics know, it is often the perception that does more damage than the reality. For those reasons, Madam Speaker, I think exceptions must be made, particularly of the Legal Aid Commission and of the Director of Public Prosecutions, to ensure that from the very beginning of the Act those two bodies are kept clearly independent and clearly autonomous. It is interesting, Madam Speaker, that the Government has managed to do this with the firefighters. The firefighters, under the present system, have a degree of autonomy and a separate employing system. The firefighters are described in the Chief Minister's introductory speech, if I remember the words correctly, as being a paramilitary organisation that needs to be dealt with in a particular way in order to resolve certain problems. I have real doubts about it. I hope that the new public service select committee looks at the firefighters to see whether they could be brought into a central government agency, which is where I believe they ought to be.
On the issue of ACTEW, Madam Speaker, we have heard a range of arguments. I have certainly been presented with those. It seems to me that the arguments are largely similar to the arguments that were debated in the previous Assembly on the corporatisation or privatisation of ACTEW. Madam Speaker, the issue of public sector reform needs to be looked at very carefully, particularly in the light of ACTEW. To present the idea that ACTEW is simply a government business enterprise and is only on about business is to cloud the issue entirely. It certainly is not the case. The real role of ACTEW is to provide services in a monopolistic way to the people of Canberra. There is some competition from natural gas, but it is minimal competition. In fact, from an environmental perspective, ACTEW ought to back off and give free rein to natural gas, which is a much more environmentally friendly way of heating houses and cooking than is electricity.
Mr Connolly: Burning hydrocarbons as opposed to using hydro-electricity is more environmentally sound?
MR MOORE: Mr Connolly raises the question of hydrocarbons. We could debate this at length, but of course the vast majority of electricity produced in Australia comes from coal. At the moment we get, and for a short while will continue to get, much of our electricity from the Snowy Mountains scheme. But, as you know, with the new grid, that will not necessarily continue. I agree that there is some competition, but I think it is minimal.
Madam Speaker, in considering these arguments, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that we do our best to take care of stage one, the transfer of our public service, and then move to stage two, the public sector reforms. Madam Speaker, the Bill is particularly complicated. We have to deal with a series of amendments. I hope that we have adequate time to deal with them, but I believe that there is inadequate time to deal with them and meet 1 July as the appropriate time for transferring the public service.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .