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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (23 September) . . Page.. 3111 ..

MRS LITTLEWOOD (continuing):

The Minister did not decide that the relocation would take place until after the review and consultation that went with it. The Department also advised "It is clear that the Minister did reject some advice we provided to him insofar as the review process was concerned and sought additional advice from the department before being satisfied".

This simply shows that the Minister had not reached a view prior to the review. While the Minister's agreement was essential for the plan to go ahead, it was the department which had undertaken to consult, and such consultation was undertaken after it had already effectively decided internally that SWOW would be relocated to Dickson. That internal view was important, not only in terms of the final decision but also in terms of the advice it provided the Minister, even to the extent of misquoting the review recommendation.

I am not for a moment suggesting that the department should be blamed; but I think you will agree, Mr Speaker, that in this instance to blame the Government is a little misleading and really just making a political comment rather than presenting the matter in an accurate light. In conclusion, I wish to thank my committee colleagues for endeavouring to facilitate an agreed position on this statement; but, unfortunately, I am unable to support it, for the reasons I have stated.

MS REILLY: I seek leave to make a statement.

Leave granted.

MS REILLY: As a member of the Social Policy Committee, I feel that I need to also add to the previous words. I think it is unfortunate and very sad that I have to make such a statement today. Having been part of the development of the statement that is before the Assembly today, I understand the processes which went on, but I think it is also important that we look at some history relating to that. In the same way as Mrs Littlewood joined the committee at the beginning of 1997, I joined this committee in March 1996. As we both are quite well aware, this was part way through an Assembly and part way through the work of the Social Policy Committee and the other committees of the Assembly.

But I must admit that, when I joined the Social Policy Committee in March 1996, I had no expectation that the committee would go back and revisit every bit of work it had done previously, because I understand government processes and Assembly processes that allow for continuity of action. Everybody does not need to be present to be able to participate in the work of a committee; you do not have to be there on day one to be able to be part of a committee or to participate in its decision-making processes. As in the other Westminster processes that we have, ministerial responsibility continues no matter who the Minister is and the date of appointment. In the same way, committees have this continuing responsibility.

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