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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (30 April) . . Page.. 275 ..

De facto Members of the Executive?

The executive committee chairs would notionally be private Members but would also be fulfilling an executive role. The Chief Minister has indicated that they would be reporting both to the Assembly and to the Cabinet. One major procedural concern to address is the need to amend the Standing Orders to provide for the executive committee chairs and their new roles.

Currently the Standing Orders provided that the presiding member of a committee can present discussion papers and reports to the Assembly when there is no other matter before the Chair. Each committee must also adhere to the Standing Orders during the preparation and consideration stage of a report prior to its presentation. The presiding member may also make a statement on behalf of the Committee. The Standing Orders further provide that the Assembly can consider a report or discussion paper after a Member has moved an appropriate motion. Should debate on the matter not be finalised on the day of presentation, consideration of the report is set down for a future sitting during Assembly Business time.

The priority of Assembly Business items for Assembly consideration is determined by the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure. Will any debate outstanding on an executive committee report also be regarded as Assembly Business and if so is there not a risk that Assembly Business time will be hijacked by executive committee business. Should the membership of the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure include executive committee chairs or members it could also have implications for the oganisation of private Members' business. Such Members would notionally be private Members but they may have an executive responsibility and perhaps obligation.

Another procedural matter that arises relates to Question Time. As the primary purpose of questions without notice is to scrutinise the Executive, would the chairs of executive committees participate in the process of asking or/and answering questions, either with or without notice either generally or in relation to those matters that are relevant to the responsibilities of their executive committees.

Standing order 275 of the Legislative Assembly states that any question relating to procedure or the conduct of business of the Assembly not provided in the Standing Orders as practices of the Assembly shall be decided according to the practice of the House of Representatives. Whilst the House of Representatives does not have executive committee chairs, the closest comparison is parliamentary secretaries. The similarities between parliamentary secretaries and the proposed roles for ACT executive committee chairs are of particular interest in that they both:

* sit in cabinet in relation to their areas of responsibility and give advice (but don't have a formal vote). [I am presuming that this will be the case with executive committee chairs];

* are appointed to assist the Executive in the performance of their duties;

* are not paid a salary for the duties performed;

* can have their appointment revoked at any time by the Prime Minister or Chief Minister.

Parliamentary secretaries sit in the row of seats immediately behind the ministerial front bench because of their role in relation to the Executive. It is of note that parliamentary secretaries, due to their role assisting the Executive, cannot participate in a number of parliamentary functions reserved for private members, namely:

* not being able to ask questions without notice;

* as a general rule, not being a member of a Committee of Inquiry;

* not participating in Private Members business.

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