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

(Quorum formed) . . Page.. 909 ..

ACTEW must still operate within a public sector milieu. Excuse the use of the French word. Under this arrangement it has the capacity to operate in a private sector milieu. That is the sector in which it must compete.

Mr Speaker, I see corporatisation as being about introducing commercialisation or commercial values into the application of the work that ACTEW does. Commercialisation is the application of private sector management techniques and structures to government bodies which were previously subject to rigid central control. That does not imply that public ownership is in any way put at risk. Members opposite, particularly Mr Berry, have been quick to equate this move with the privatisation of ACTEW. Let me remind members - if it is not already clear to them - that privatisation, even if it were the policy of this Government in respect of ACTEW, could not occur without further legislation. To achieve such a change, we would have to obtain the support of a majority of members on the floor of this Assembly. If you see this as a staging post towards privatisation, it would be that only if it were seen by members of the community as showing up the need on ACTEW's part for there to be a more efficient operation, one which could not be delivered under government control; but that is not the position we are in today. We believe that ACTEW needs to be retained by the government sector; and it will be, under this model. It is quite false and dishonest for those opposite to suggest that this is in fact some form of clandestine privatisation.

I think that those opposite have shown a considerable lack of diligence in pursuing exactly what it is that this particular model is all about. Frankly, I would have expected better research from them if they were going to make a considered contribution to this debate. Mr Whitecross, for example, who is also not here - he is off doing something else, I assume - made a suggestion about this Bill. (Quorum formed) Mr Speaker, Mr Whitecross told us that the whistleblowers legislation was not going to apply to these Bills. I picked up my copy of the consequential amendments Bill and turned to the fifth page - I did not have to get very far - to see that the Schedule amends the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1994. That is the whistleblowers Act. It does apply to this legislation.

I wonder whether members of the Labor Party, in their research on this matter, have bothered to go to their colleagues in other States, who have been in this position before, and ask them why they did what they did. I take it from the silence opposite that they have not done that. I think that is reprehensible, Mr Speaker. They are entering this debate saying, “You are making a mistake, Government. You have not proved your case. You must prove to us that corporatisation is the way to go”. Mr Speaker, they have done so without clearly canvassing the reasons that their Labor colleagues in other States have seen the imperative to go down this path. For goodness’ sake, we are corporatising only our second body in the ACT. We are way behind in this game; we are not exactly leading the pack. You would think that those opposite would have had ample opportunity to canvass views around this country. We all know that, if this were anywhere else, people like Mr Connolly from the Right would be leading these sorts of initiatives, not criticising a Liberal Government for doing them. But the imperative of this Opposition at this point in time is, “You cannot go along with what the Liberal Government wants to do, because they are the Liberals and they are not to be trusted”.

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