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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 524 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I accept that there is some small element of this report which the Government would rather not make public.

Mr Humphries: For good reasons.

MS FOLLETT: I do not accept that it is for good reasons; nevertheless, I am prepared to respect those reasons. The information, I believe, could well be made public without damage to the Government or to the Territory; but, in a spirit of conciliation, which we never see from the Government, I am quite prepared to accept that that material be excised. I would like to see the report so that I can study it at some length because it is the basis for a very major decision of government, a decision that will affect not only the working lives of our own work force in the information technology sector but also, of course, both the public sector and the private sector generally in Canberra. If the document is the basis of such a major change in the way that the Public Service conducts its business, then it is only right that that document get a public airing.

MR MOORE (4.53): Mr Speaker, there are a number of issues that I think it is important to deal with. Firstly, Mr Speaker, I also was fortunate enough to have a briefing today from officers of the Public Service whom the Chief Minister made available at lunchtime. I thank her and I thank those officers, who clearly were happy to answer any of the questions that I raised. After that briefing, Mr Speaker, I became more convinced that the amendment is not necessary. However, I accept, in a spirit of conciliation, as Ms Follett put it, that that issue can wait until we have had a chance to study that document even more carefully.

This does really highlight, Mr Speaker, the Government's reluctance to part with anything. The Chief Minister raised these issues as to the legality of this motion. She said that it may well focus on individuals and that the commercial-in-confidence nature would mean that there was a loss to the Territory. Having taken that briefing, Mr Speaker, I am less convinced than ever that that is the case. I think that what we have is a culture where a public service and a government feel that it is more comfortable to keep things to themselves, particularly when they have anything to do with the area of business. I think we would be far better off if the culture were around the other way, where the response was, "Here we have a report done by some consultants that now ought to go out into the community and be exposed to a set of different opinions". An issue like this has such widespread ramifications for a range of people - for the Territory itself and for the finances of the Territory, and, as such, the Government; for the public servants who are working in the area, and we have talked about the briefing paper prepared by the CPSU; and for small business. These are the sorts of issues that need to be dealt with while we are debating this issue.

Mrs Carnell brought up two previous examples. The first one was about VITAB and I suggest that there is a major difference. That was a specific contract between two groups, so I am informed, with particular provisions about what could be open and what could not be. That is what I am informed, and I guess that it is something that we will not know for some years. The other issue Mrs Carnell brought up occurred in my first year in the Assembly, I think, when I shredded a document. Mr Speaker, members who were there will remember that I apologised to the Assembly. I said, "Yes, that was a mistake",

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