Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 7 Hansard (30 June) . . Page.. 1844 ..
MR KAINE (continuing):
What is patently clear is that, in the absence of statutory penalties in the Financial Management Act, the provisions of the Financial Management Act are such that only this legislature can be the arbitrator. We are responsible, not the Auditor-General. It is our duty to make a decision about this matter and, of course, we have to rule on the evidence that is available to us. Mr Osborne, for one, must have a clear understanding of all this because he has made some previous statements on the matter. For instance, on 2 December 1997 he said:
The spirit of the law is clear - that money raised from the people can be spent only after the purposes for which it is to be spent have been properly examined and approved by the people's representatives in parliament. It is perhaps the most important provision of the Constitution, and it is there to ensure that we do not become a banana republic.
Right on, Mr Osborne; right on. I have no doubt that Mr Osborne meant exactly what he said. In the same speech, less than two years ago, he went on and said:
... I would like the Liberals to listen hard to this, because they do not seem to understand it - you are not a business. Government is not a business, and you are not chief executives, no matter what you think. The standards required of you are infinitely greater and more onerous than those required of a business. You are dealing with public money and that is a sacred trust.
Right on, Mr Osborne. Nine days later Mr Osborne amplified his thoughts even further. He said this:
Over the past five years, around Australia - and in Canberra - there has been a sinister new development. Public money is being spent on commercial deals stamped "never to be revealed to the community". This is done behind the smokescreen of commercial-in-confidence.
How many times, I ask you, members, have we heard this commercial-in-confidence bit over the last week or two? We have heard it constantly, and Mr Moore thinks that is okay. Mr Moore thinks it is fine. All I can say to Mr Osborne is: "We are with you, if indeed you are as solid in your views as you say you are". But, of course, he is not here to listen. Discussions that I have had with both Ms Tucker and Mr Rugendyke encourage me that they are sincere in their belief, and the time is long overdue to stop the rot.
I am aware that some people present have had some concern over that infamous and ill-advised jointly signed letter that the Liberals and their fellow traveller, Mr Moore, put about last week suggesting that if Mrs Carnell was forced from office no other Liberal would put up his hand for the job. I can say, with some evidence, Mr Speaker, that the letter was not worth the paper it was printed on. I can quote a similar letter that I received in 1989. I will read an extract out of that letter. It said:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .