Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 1040 ..

I heard Mr Connolly ask you in his speech whether you would be prepared to provide for us, as a separate document, an analysis, program by program. I think it is a perfectly reasonable request. It is quite clear that we are going to pass this Supply Bill, and we are going to do it today. Mr Speaker, having drawn this to the Chief Minister's attention, I did not hear a clear answer to Mr Connolly's question. Perhaps she gave it and I was not paying close enough attention. I believe that it is entirely appropriate that we have that information before us, and I would ask you to assure us that you will be able to do that.

MR WOOD (4.51): Mr Speaker, in talking briefly on this amendment, I reflect back on question time today when the Opposition sought to come to grips with the new Administrative Arrangements and to try to understand their complexity. We are not the only ones in this building who find them difficult. Let me look at the amending Schedule. I refer the Chief Minister to Divisions 60, 110 and 150. In order for me to come to grips with both the difficulty of the paucity of information on this amendment and the complexity of the data on the Administrative Arrangements, could she define for me the connections or the separations between Division 60, Business, the Arts, Sport and Tourism, $5m plus; Division 110, Arts and Heritage, $4.5m; and Division 150, Sport, Recreation and Racing, $5m plus? There is a connection somewhere between those. I am sure that there is a very logical answer, but nobody is able to discern that from the way this is presented. She might explain all that to me.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (4.52): Again I come back to the issue of reporting against supply. Mr Moore went on at length about our supposedly moving money from one area to another. It is true that this Assembly must be able to scrutinise that, as you will be able to in the budget, which is the approach that we have always taken. The budget is produced on a program basis. This time you will find reporting at a program and subprogram level. At that stage that is compared with budgets of previous years that the Assembly, the Estimates Committee and individual members look at to determine what the new budget looks like. In other words, you compare budgets with budgets, and you report against that budget. How we go as a government is reported against that budget that we will bring down on 19 September. What is not done is reporting against supply. It is never done. Reporting is never done against supply. Supply is exactly that. It is the amount of money required to get us up to the budget, full stop. It is not a mini-budget; it is not stage one of the budget; it is not a five months budget.

Ms Follett: We do understand.

MRS CARNELL: If you understand that, you would realise that you cannot assess policy direction from a supply Bill because there simply is not - - -

Ms Follett: We are entitled to scrutinise it. The Assembly is entitled to scrutinise it.

MRS CARNELL: That is true. The Assembly is entitled to scrutinise it, and the Assembly can do so. As I said, we will not bring down another supply Bill. The issues here are quite simple. When you look at the Chief Minister's Department, the $75m, you can see that all that is is a straight addition of the three departments from previously.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .