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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (2 December) . . Page.. 4349 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

There is no alternative but to put a legislative requirement on the Government. We do this - that is, the Labor Opposition does this - in the full knowledge that when we are in government we will have to meet this requirement. It is not something that we will shirk. We will be happy to do so. We will be boasting less about our theoretical commitment to transparency and accountability, and delivering more.

The Bill that has been put forward by my colleague Mr Whitecross has a number of components. There are enhanced definitions which align with those of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, definitions which will ensure that we are provided with full information about the ACT's public sector trading enterprises; a requirement that monthly financial statements are available within 30 days of the end of the month; a requirement for the Government to provide in a timely fashion quarterly performance reports which focus on outputs; a legislative requirement that information provided in the budget papers include comparative figures for the previous year, three-year forward estimates, and information related to public sector trading enterprises.

I will be moving a number of amendments to this Bill. Those amendments have been circulated in my name. The amendments to clause 4 have been drafted following further technical advice from the Australian Bureau of Statistics on definitional conventions in national accounts across Australia. In addition, following a discussion with Assembly colleagues and advice from the Office of Financial Management, I have agreed that it would be appropriate to require the tabling of various financial statements and reports within 30 days of the end of the particular period in question. This will mean that we will still receive information in a timely fashion, but it will allow an orderly work program in the Office of Financial Management and should ensure that the statements are accurate.

I am also proposing an amendment to section 5 of the principal Act to require the budget to be brought down by 30 June of the previous financial year. The Government should have recognised the need for the amendment consequential upon the legislation moving the ACT's election date to October, and it missed it. As I said at the time, that legislation was brought on hastily and without a proper working through of the consequences. I was berated by those opposite on the non-Labor benches in relation to my attitude at the time. I said that this needed to be considered carefully. This was one important area of that move on legislation which was overlooked in the haste to ram it through.

My proposed amendment ensures that in an election year there will be adequate time for the Assembly to examine, debate and pass the budget prior to an election. Currently, the Financial Management Act requires that the budget be brought down by 30 September of the budget year. Clearly, this has the potential to put the Assembly in an untenable position. Either there will be pressure to pass the budget without adequate time for scrutiny or the ACT will go to an election without a budget, which is also possible.

It strikes me that the Government has abandoned its duty to the community by not providing for this particular outcome in the amendments which it has put forward. In the latter case - that is, if the Government were to go to an election without a budget - there would be enormous pressure for the new government to proceed with the budget put together by its predecessor or to scramble together a new budget. No government should be put in such a position. No Assembly should be pressured to do less than

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