Page 4225 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 29 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I know that if I go to anyone in this place and say, "Your faults are these: One, two, three, four, five", generally, people are fairly unhappy and uncomfortable with that process; but it is part of the nature of being rigorous in identifying ways in which we can do better next time.
The fact that the Government has been effusive in its praise of this report surely tells us something about the nature of this report. It tells us that this report constitutes a let-off for the Government and an opportunity which might have been a serious threat to the credibility of the Government and which might have constituted a battering of the Government's image - whatever image it might have - for good management. Instead, the report has come as an opportunity to touch lightly on some areas of concern - and I put it no stronger than that - and leave important issues and issues of more moment to other times and other places to be dealt with.
Madam Speaker, this report is a massive and greatly regretted lost opportunity for this Assembly, and our committee process in particular, to restate the supremacy of the investigative powers we have to hold the Government accountable and to scrutinise its activities. I merely ask members to look over the summary of recommendations on pages viii and ix.
Mr Wood: Are you giving your colleagues a serve, Mr Humphries?
MR HUMPHRIES: I know that this is uncomfortable, Mr Wood, but look at the report; look at the recommendations in the report. Most of these recommendations are almost internal matters; for example:
The Committee recommends that the Government alert all agencies to the need to ensure that all annual reports presented to the Assembly are complete and accurate and that all agencies adhere to their statutory obligation to report to the Assembly within the required time for such reporting.
Where is the meat? Where is the substance in those recommendations? What is it in here that puts heat on a government? Is that not what we are supposed to be doing in this process, in a parliamentary system - holding the Government to account, putting the heat on it, making it accountable and making it answer the tough questions? There were tough questions asked during that process, Madam Speaker; but apparently the weaknesses in the Government's administrative process have not appeared in this report, and that is a matter of great regret to me.
We have cut off the essential process of scrutiny and accountability which our estimates committees were famous for, until the report that this committee has now delivered. Both sides of the chamber - including Mrs Grassby, Mr Wood and people on that side of the chamber when in opposition - have been vigorous when sitting on estimates committees and commenting critically on governments. They did not hand down reports like this when that happened. Even when they did not have the numbers on estimates committees in those days, they did not hand down reports like this, did they, Mr Wood? Did they, Mrs Grassby? They handed down reports that were tough and hard-hitting and that put the pressure on the Government. It has not happened here.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .