Page 1948 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Clauses 2 and 3, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.
Clause 4
MR MOORE (11.30): I move:
Page 2, line 12, add the following subclause:
"(2) Subsection (1) applies in relation to the appointment of a person under Division 1 of Part II of the Audit Act 1989 to be the Auditor-General for the Territory or to act as Auditor-General for the Territory as if the power to make that appointment were vested in a Minister, and in that application the reference in that subsection to the Minister shall be read as a reference to the Executive.".
The amendment to clause 4 seeks to include the Auditor-General. The Auditor-General is appointed by the Executive, and the Bill deals with appointments by Ministers. Clearly, most members recognise that the Auditor-General is a person who responds to and reports to this Assembly, and therefore it is appropriate that the same process be used for the Auditor-General. Indeed, the Auditor-General wrote to me and pointed out that he was not included in the Bill, and I had this amendment drawn up to ensure that he would be.
The amendment creates a fiction, effectively, to say that for the purposes of this Act you consider the Auditor-General as though he had been appointed by a Minister. The Auditor-General is therefore included in this style of scrutiny. The perception by the Auditor-General that he ought to be included in this process indicates that the process is an entirely appropriate one that will allow for scrutiny of such positions and, particularly in terms of the Auditor-General, indicates the extra faith the Assembly will have in the scrutiny conducted of the Auditor-General. I commend this amendment to the Bill.
MR HUMPHRIES (11.32): Madam Speaker, I am indebted to the Chief Minister for making available a list of all the statutory appointments that are provided for under various pieces of ACT legislation, so that we have some idea of how the legislation Mr Moore has put forward will operate. Although I welcome the amendment that has been put forward, I am still not clear on whether certain appointments should or should not fall within the framework of the Bill. Those are matters that are going to have to be resolved over a period. It is better to take, in a sense, a minimalist approach at this point and then work out over a period whether appointments should also be brought under this process.
As I read the list the Chief Minister has circulated and the amendment Mr Moore has circulated, I assume, for example, that the Director of Public Prosecutions will be appointed subject to this - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .