Page 2534 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 23 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MRS CARNELL: It was interesting that in the health area, Madam Speaker, the Government still could not explain last year's Estimates Committee report. It could not explain a situation where $3m was supposed to be saved. Mr Berry could not explain where it was supposed to be saved last year, and, of course, in the end it was not saved, as we found out from the Arthur Andersen report. We also found out, as the report says, what is happening in ACTION. We are not saving money, but there are fewer passengers on the buses. That is what is happening in ACTION - fewer and fewer people are using the bus service. That seemed to be all right. That seemed to be quite acceptable. We will spend $1m a week, but we will have fewer and fewer passengers on the bus service.
I suppose I have to finish off with the VITAB situation. I will be fascinated to hear from the Chief Minister how the $3.3m is going to cost the taxpayers nothing, as her Minister was very happy to tell the people of Canberra recently. It was interesting, in the Estimates Committee, to go through what had actually happened in the VITAB area and what was actually happening with ACTTAB. It will also be interesting to hear the Minister explain what he is going to do about the big gap that the Northern Territory TAB is going to place in our budget.
MS ELLIS (8.14): I have only a few brief comments to make, more about the processes than about the report itself. Whilst I have not formally dissented from the report, there are some aspects of the comments in it about which I do feel some discomfort. There are some comments that I consider to be simply of the political type rather than reflecting the scrutiny that I believe the Estimates Committee process is there to carry out. Maybe I should add, Madam Speaker, that the method by which the draft reports are produced for the committee should be examined in the future. Under the current system it is almost unavoidable that political bias will enter the process. As a member of the committee, I intend raising this as a serious issue at the next Estimates Committee process.
The estimates process is very important to this place. Not very often do I, as a member of this place, stand and make comment that I believe to be fairly critical of the processes in which I find myself; but in this instance I believe that I have no choice but to do so. Our committee system is an excellent one - I believe that we produce excellent work through the committee system - but I must admit that at times during our most recent Estimates Committee process I think those standards were threatened. I do not personally subscribe to harassing witnesses. I do not consider this a clever way of getting to the facts of a matter. When questioning members of our public service, for instance, I do not agree that a harassing and haranguing approach is warranted or justified. I recall last year's well-publicised tutelage of the Liberal members of the Estimates Committee at the time by the then famous Bronwyn Bishop. Given her apparent political demise, or trip to the wilderness, or whatever it might be - - -
Mr Kaine: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I received no tutelage from Bronwyn Bishop or from anybody else in the way that I deal with the Estimates Committee. I would like that assertion withdrawn.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Kaine, if you want to make a personal explanation you should seek - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .