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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (17 June) . . Page.. 1625 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

We had a discussion in the committee about performance indicators. It seems to happen every year. There has been little progress in developing environmental and social indicators. We are happy to see the specific recommendation about tourism and events. Ms McRae thought that we received good answers on that; I cannot say that I did. The Green Globe was referenced as the way the Tourism Corporation deals with standards of tourism and their environmental impact. I asked for a copy of that Green Globe, or whatever it is, but still have not received it.

I was also very concerned when I was assured that the rally around the lake had been deemed not to have had an environmental impact. (Extension of time granted) I was assured that the rally was fine and that it did not have any environmental impact. When I asked, "Who decided that?", I was informed that it was the person who actually organised the rally. We obviously cannot have great confidence in that process. So, I am glad to see that in the budget papers next year there will be indications of how the Tourism Corporation is actually meeting its obligations and what impact any events it organises have on the environment.

We also got up a recommendation about including in the budget other sorts of government targets. For example, we have the target on waste, which received a lot of publicity - no waste by 2010. We want to have those sorts of things included in the budget so that each year we can see how the Government is meeting those targets. Often they receive great publicity when they are announced, but we do not see what is happening each year with regard to meeting those targets.

I would also like to mention that there was a recommendation last year that ACTION develop environmental CSOs, but we did not see that this year. Another recommendation from last year's Estimates Committee report was that the Education Department develop a policy on consultation with regard to significant decisions, including significant policy changes, relating to the management of all schools and colleges, including their possible twinning and closure. We have had an Ombudsman's report that came out and said that the department totally failed in that area of consultation. I am amused to see that there is always 100 per cent given as the score for our executive officers, and I wonder where the Ombudsman's report fitted into that 100 per cent. I do not quite see how that system works either. Maybe it will turn up in next year's budget, but I somehow doubt it.

MS REILLY (12.22): I was very pleased to be a member of the Estimates Committee and part of this very important process, because it is the opportunity to scrutinise the workings of government. I think it is an interesting process as well, and it is full of quite ritualised activity. I have seen it from both sides, having been a public servant who has been scrutinised and now having the opportunity to scrutinise back. It was quite fascinating to look at it from both sides. But this does not take away from the importance of the process. For any government, it is important to have transparency of process, because it is giving information to the community about what decisions are being made by government which affect their lives. The budget sets out the revenue-raising measures of the Government and the priorities they have for expenditure, and this affects the whole community. We should look towards encouraging more community involvement in the estimates process so that people understand and have the information about what expenditure is taking place.

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