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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (2 December) . . Page.. 4245 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

that the use of commercial-in-confidence is more of an ambit claim than a well thought through claim by the Government of what is actually of a confidential nature. Notwithstanding that, I return to the conclusion of the committee that, if information can be disclosed to the Government on a confidential basis, there is no reason for it not to be disclosed to the Assembly on a confidential basis.

Mr Speaker, a committee with more time should return to these matters, to ensure that the committee has a proper avenue for scrutinising the efficiency and effectiveness of these programs. Recommendations 3 and 6 go to this matter. If it is not dealt with by a committee or by the Auditor-General, then there is no actual mechanism for the Assembly to satisfy itself that the resources devoted to this program are being used in the most efficient and effective way. Mrs Littlewood, in her dissenting remarks, makes the suggestion that she does not see the point in having a further inquiry. I can only say that there are a number of matters which deserve closer scrutiny and further inquiry in relation to the efficiency and effectiveness of the scheme. It does not have to be a trawling exercise for political point-scoring, as Mrs Littlewood seems to think. Mrs Littlewood appears, in her dissenting report, to be obsessed with political point-scoring. Instead, it can be just a prudent scrutiny of what is the best way of using the limited resources of the Territory to achieve results.

Mr Speaker, we were simply unable to test a number of the criteria set out in the documentation about the operation of the business incentive scheme. For example, we were unable to test whether assistance to businesses was such as to provide unfair competition to other players in the market. For example, the committee was unable to satisfy itself that the assistance provided to Fujitsu gave it an unfair competitive advantage in the marketplace compared to other IT companies already operating in Canberra. We were unable to scrutinise that because we were unable to access any documents about the Fujitsu deal in order to ascertain whether, in fact, the deal with Fujitsu gave it an unfair advantage in competition. A great number of issues need to be investigated, and the committee is recommending that these matters be followed through in the next Assembly.

Mr Speaker, one of the recommendations of the committee was that the Government develop an industry plan which ought to be considered by an Assembly committee in the next Assembly and which should form the framework for the way in which business incentive and industry assistance arrangements operate. I think the development of an industry plan is an absolutely essential element of any coherent industry policy. After this inquiry was announced, the Government indicated that they would be coming forward with an industry strategy. That was confirmed by officials in the hearings before the Public Accounts Committee. However, we have yet to see this industry strategy. It should be noted that the industry assistance package and the business incentive scheme have been operating for three years in the absence of an industry strategy. Mr Speaker, we think that, for the future, it is important that there be an industry strategy or an industry plan which enjoys the broad support of people in the Assembly and the community as an appropriate framework for carrying forward the operation of business incentive and industry assistance schemes.

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