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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 2899 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

As Mr Moore says, we have to make sure that there is a level playing field. I am sure that the Government and the Chief Minister would agree with those comments. It is very important.

The Public Accounts Committee has an important role to play in reporting to this Assembly on the expenditure of public funds and has an important role to play in the scrutinising of that expenditure. For those reasons, it is important that we investigate and review the scheme through this inquiry. Equally, as the Chief Minister says, it is also important to look at other possible ways to improve the operation and scope of these sorts of schemes to promote economic growth and development. Ultimately, one of the key challenges that we in this Assembly face is the challenge to create jobs in Canberra. For all of those reasons, I believe it is appropriate that the Assembly support Mr Whitecross's motion this morning.

MS TUCKER (11.56): This is an inquiry that we will also be supporting. My colleague Lucy Horodny would be on this committee and is quite happy to be part of such an inquiry. I have just been talking to members here briefly about the possibility of expanding the terms of reference to include looking at how well any business development that occurs in the ACT complies with principles of ecologically sustainable development. I take the point that with the timeframe proposed it would probably not be possible to go into that in great detail. However, Mr Whitecross has expressed willingness, when evaluating how these schemes work and the objectives under which they work, to have a look at whether or not the environment and the sustainability of business are actually taken into account. I am happy to hear that reassurance from Mr Whitecross, and I wish the committee good luck.

MR WHITECROSS (11.57): I thank members for their support. Let me reiterate one thing: I am very conscious of the sensitivity of some of the issues that the committee will look at, as I indicated before. I know that Mrs Carnell is anxious about that. I believe that accountability is important as well, as I said. I believe that the committee process provides a way of ensuring that accountability, without some of the pitfalls that might exist if all the details of these schemes were simply laid before parliament and totally exposed to the public gaze. I understand that dealing with private companies is a difficulty. Those sensitivities have caused the Government to be perhaps a little bit coy with information when answering questions on notice by my colleague Mr Corbell and others. I hope that, taking account of my understanding of the sensitivities, we can look forward to full cooperation by the Government. I think Mrs Carnell was indicating that before.

Amendments agreed to.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

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