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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (19 November) . . Page.. 3833 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Planning and Land Management Division on 23 October. That period seems very long - between 10 and 23 October - basically for a document to move from my office to the Planning and Land Management Division of the Department of Urban Services. Indeed, it was almost two weeks. I do not have an explanation of why it took so long to go between those two places. I will indicate that, since this incident occurred, we have changed the procedure for the movement of documents between my office and my department and that particular transmission method is not used any more.

It was sent back to my office five days later, on 28 October. Amendments had been made as I had requested, but a further change had been made by PALM so that the answer was fully correct. They had, in other words, identified something about the answer which ought to have been changed and had modified it. It was not a very significant change, but there was a change that they had made from the original that I had approved. In my office there was some uncertainty as to whether I needed to see that a further time before it was submitted. Eventually, it was submitted to me on Monday of this week. I approved the change; it was then lodged that same day; and Ms Horodny received it either yesterday or today.

There are some periods there in which delay has occurred. I can only indicate that I regret that that delay has occurred and I will find out why that delay has occurred and advise Ms Horodny about that. I reject the assertion that this indicates any fundamental problem with the way in which the system works. If this is typical of the system, obviously it is a serious problem. I do not believe that it is. I also want to indicate that I have great confidence in my staff being able to handle matters backwards and forwards between my office and my department and within my office on these matters. There were some comments made today about my staff. Clearly, as Minister, I am responsible for what goes on in my office. On the basis of discussions I have had with my staff today, I certainly reject any suggestion that any of them have been less than diligent in the way they have handled their duties. I am satisfied that they have been diligent and I stand by them.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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