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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 2 Hansard (11 March) . . Page.. 620 ..

MR BERRY

preparation of the budget. For us to take on that role would be irresponsible. It would be impossible for us to come up with a comprehensive, complex budget without the resources which are available to Ministers. There are 17,000 public servants out there, available to Ministers and to the Executive, to assist them in the preparation of the budget and to carry out their functions under the self-government Act.

I am surprised that Ministers would support moves by the Chief Minister and try to encourage this smoke and mirrors act. What they seem to be doing is saying, "Our jobs are redundant. We do not need to be here any more. We could hand it over to others in the place who would probably be more competent". Well, on the last point they are correct, but the fact of the matter is that they hold the role at this point and should perform the role in accordance with the duties laid out under the self-government Act.

I think you also need to have a look at standing orders 200 and 201. They make it very clear. I quote:

An enactment, vote or resolution for the appropriation of the public money of the Territory must not be proposed in the Assembly except by a Minister. Such proposals may be introduced by a Minister without notice.

Limitations on amendments

A member, other than a Minister, may not move an amendment to a money proposal, as specified in standing order 200, if that amendment would increase the amount of public money of the Territory to be appropriated.

That is consistent with the self-government Act. Again it makes it clear that this nonsense motion that the Chief Minister has put up is merely a public relations exercise, quite contrary to what she said when she opened the debate on Tuesday - that this is not about a 10-second media grab. Well, that is probably true in one sense. It is not about one 10-second media grab, it is about many; but mostly about shifting the responsibility from her to others. That has been the hallmark of this Chief Minister's reign, if I can call it that, here in the ACT. Quite clearly, she is asking us to do her job for her.

To look at it another way, the Chief Minister, as I said earlier, is trying to shift responsibility. As I said earlier, it is the role of the Executive to develop budgets and it is the role of the Assembly to scrutinise them. Ever since the Chief Minister stopped being a member of the Opposition we have seen her anger over scrutiny. She has attacked not only the Estimates Committee but the individuals on it. It is not the role of the Opposition and the crossbenchers to develop budgets. The Opposition would, of course, offer itself for government, given the opportunity, and I am quite confident that the Opposition, Labor, would do a far better job. We certainly would not try to divest ourselves of the responsibility to deal with the matters given to us under the self-government Act.

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