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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 11 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 2872 ..

Mr Connolly: No. The Estimates Committee is the opportunity to ask the agency heads direct questions.

MRS CARNELL: That is right, but the Minister is the person who is the primary witness. The Minister is there with the agency people, not the other way round. They are not responsible to the Assembly; the Minister is. That is the way that this Government has always worked. We must not end up - - -

Mr Humphries: The way all governments have worked.

MRS CARNELL: All governments. We must not end up with a situation where those sorts of performance contracts are used not for management outcomes, not for good outcomes for the people of the ACT, but for political purposes in this house. They would be, as sure as night follows day. We would see situations where senior executives may have done better in a few areas and not as well in others. That means that a Minister or a chief executive would sit down with that person and determine how to do better in those areas. That is good management. That is how contracts are used. That is the approach that I would take, and so would my Ministers. We do not want a situation where that sort of debate is held on the floor of this Assembly, because it is simply not fair to the people involved. It is fine to take the Minister on if he or she does not perform; that is the basis of government. But it is not fine to take senior managers on, on the floor of this Assembly or on the front page of the Canberra Times, for their performance.

Therefore, I believe that the approach that we have taken in response to Michael Moore's concerns, which allows members of this Assembly to see contracts, if they have a good reason for doing so - - -

Mr Connolly: And what is a good reason?

MRS CARNELL: That would depend on which bits they wanted to see, I suppose. Just as our expressions of financial interests do, this will allow people who have a good reason to have a look at them. They will not be tabled in the Assembly, and they will not end up on the front page of the Canberra Times, but people will be allowed to see them if there is a good reason to do so. It then backs that up with FOI legislation and the AAT, if necessary, just to make sure. Just as people who ask to have a look at the financial interest statements of members of this Assembly, when they have a good reason, are rarely, if ever, knocked back, to my knowledge - - -

Ms Follett: They do not have to go to FOI, do they? No.

MRS CARNELL: If they were knocked back, if they did not have a good reason, in the view of the Speaker - - -

Ms Follett: You do not need a good reason.

MRS CARNELL: You do need a good reason. I am sorry; you need a good reason to have a look at the financial statements.

Mr Connolly: Research and public interest.

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