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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (20 November) . . Page.. 3904 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

last night's meeting was not some kind of snub to that consultation process. I did not know it was going on and I was not invited to attend. I am always willing to attend those meetings to hear people's concerns face to face. Indeed, there will be people who want to see me about this issue and I will also hear them face to face.

Mr Speaker, I emphasise again that this Government has a clear commitment. It has a clear commitment towards squeezing the maximum amount of juice out of every lemon that the taxpayer provides us with. We have a duty, which we take very seriously, to ensure that if there is a better way of delivering the same service or an improved service to the community we will find it. That is a commitment that I think we are entitled to make on the mandate we have from the people of Canberra. This is part of that process. It is a trial of a new system of grant-making across the Government. I say again, as I said during question time, that if the process does not produce a better outcome for all concerned, particularly for those who receive grants, a different system or the old system will have to be considered.

Mr Speaker, not trialling some new system is the most reprehensible of all, given that there are very considerable sums of money involved in this process. I stand by that process. I hope that members of the Assembly will realise that it is time for some innovation and some new thinking. I know that Mr Wood is very much wedded to the past, to the glory days of the Follett Government; but, Mr Speaker, things have moved on. The Territory's financial position demands that we look at innovations, and that is what we are now doing.

MS TUCKER (4.15): I was at that meeting last night, too, and I would have to agree with Mr Wood's impressions of the meeting. I indeed was left with questions that were not appropriate to ask of the bureaucrats. I concur with Mr Wood that those public servants bore the brunt of anger against this political decision or proposal. I am still not clear whether it is a decision or a proposal. Anyway, there is obviously - - -

Mr Wood: Yes, they decided.

MS TUCKER: It sounds like that, from what Mr Wood says. I have not seen that brochure, actually; but if it is as he quoted, to assist in developing arrangements for a trial, it sounds pretty well as if it has been sorted out and it is going to happen. I was under the impression, as were other people there, that it was actually a consultation; but maybe it was one of those sorts of consultations that happen after the event, and that has not worked on many occasions here.

Mr Humphries: It is a trial, Kerrie.

MS TUCKER: Yes, but the point is that some people were under the impression, incorrectly, obviously, that this was an idea. So you have come up with a trial of a specific - - -

Mr Humphries: You should be dispelling those things, not feeding them.

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