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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 10 Hansard (26 November) . . Page.. 3061 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

I remember having a debate here on this issue and a number of members disagreed with the point that Mr Humphries makes that it is absolutely and totally tied to the Urban Services Committee. It seems much more likely to me that it would be tied to the Chief Minister's Portfolio Committee, which has an overarching responsibility through the public accounts committee functions, to look at issues of, and I quote from the terms of reference, fiscal and economic policy. So, it is perfectly appropriate for the Chief Minister's Portfolio Committee to do so.

I heard Mr Quinlan apologise to Mr Hird this morning about the lack of consultation. I do not know whether Mr Hird is accepting that apology or is still too grumpy because he was up so late, but an apology was made.

Mr Hird: I am not grumpy; it was a gross discourtesy.

MS TUCKER: He has apologised for the discourtesy, Mr Hird. I think everyone is acknowledging that it is useful to have consultation between committee chairs. Mr Quinlan has apologised, so that issue has been dealt with as much as it could. But it is not a reason to totally spit the dummy, as Mr Humphries is suggesting we should do in his amendment.

Mr Humphries also made the rather strange claim that, if a committee wants to look at economic issues or any other issues and get informed, they could do that by getting a briefing but that it is not the role of the committee to become informed on an area and then make recommendations. One of the purposes of committees as explained to me when I first came here was to look in detail at issues of concern to the Assembly and make recommendations around those issues. So, for me, it seems to be a perfectly logical and very important subject that the Chief Minister's Portfolio Committee have decided to take on at this point. If they are prepared to spend the time to analyse and evaluate what is happening in this area and then make recommendations to the Government, the Government should be grateful. It may actually improve their performance. It is advisory only, as we well know, so I cannot see why Mr Humphries is so nervous about three other members of the Assembly taking the trouble to get a much more detailed understanding of the issues.

In conclusion, I have dealt with the consultation. Mr Quinlan has acknowledged that it is not appropriate to be sending these sorts of issues to the Speaker, particularly, as members have already mentioned, the Speaker himself is on this committee. It seems a very poor response to come from a member of the Assembly to refer it to him. It would obviously put him in a difficult position. Anyway, why should the Assembly have the right to totally override the position of a committee which has decided to take on an inquiry? The committee informed the Assembly this morning of the intentions of the committee. They are within its terms of reference; so, there is no argument here, but we are sorry for Mr Hird if he is upset.

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