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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 2 Hansard (25 February) . . Page.. 379 ..

MR BERRY: Who knows, with you lot opposite, and that atmosphere of fear and intimidation which we now know occurs in a public administration dominated by contracts. For my part, I am not prepared to widen the powers of the administration on such flimsy evidence as has been put forward in this case. It is far too flimsy. After one or two incidents, by the look of it, on the evidence that has been provided in this place, there has been a push by the bureaucracy to have the Government widen its powers. Mr Speaker, we will not be in that. This is clearly an inappropriate move, especially with the performance of this Government as the background music. This Government has behaved badly in the way it treats its employees. It has behaved badly in the way it treats its appointees to public boards and authorities. It, in a sense, has been censured for that. I would not agree to an extension of the powers of the Government and the administration in the way that has been suggested.

I think what was said in the first place was correct. There was a comprehensive range of general obligations of public employees set out in the Public Sector Management Act covering a couple of pages. A full range of obligations, from (a) to (t), which employees are expected to observe, was set out. I will read the relevant part of what is now proposed:

(2) A public employee shall not -

(a) engage in improper conduct as a public employee; or

(b) engage in improper conduct otherwise than as a public employee, being conduct that adversely affects the performance of his or her duties or brings the public sector, or any part of it, into disrepute.

That is pretty wide. It was thought unnecessary at first. On the basis of somebody being assaulted, which was clearly a police matter, the Government wants to widen the influence of the administration. As I said earlier, Mr Speaker, we will not be in that.

MR MOORE (12.16): Mr Speaker, I rise to support the legislation in principle; but, like Mr Berry, I have some difficulties with clauses 5 and 6 of the Bill. In her introductory speech the Chief Minister addressed clause 5 of the Bill in particular. I quote from the Chief Minister's speech:

However, a number of cases have arisen that have highlighted the difficulty of drawing a clear line between work-related matters and the private lives of public employees.

The argument is then put that the Government has decided to proceed in this way. The Chief Minister began by saying this:

A conscious decision was made in enacting the Public Sector Management Act 1994 to narrow the disciplinary provisions compared to the operation of section 56 of the Commonwealth Public Service Act 1922.

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