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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 13 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4120 ..

MS CARNELL: That is right, individual ones for individual people. Mr Stanhope said that I should stop the payments to those seven public servants; in fact, seven are still getting them, as we know. Mr Speaker, should I become involved in the administration of allowances of public servants without authorisation? No, the authority rested with the Public Service, specifically chief executives and the Commissioner for Public Administration. That is what the rule said in this instance and that is what happened. I took the appropriate action in changing the policy by referring the issue to the independent Remuneration Tribunal. I did not think that the existing rule, set in place by the Follett Government in 1994, should continue to apply. I thought that the arrangements should be formulated differently. The reference to the tribunal about changing the policy was appropriate. Becoming directly involved, hands on politicisation of the Public Service, was not appropriate and still is not, Mr Speaker.

To do what I did - that is, to refer it to the tribunal - was the role of a Minister and a government that were providing an independent source to set and determine remuneration. I argued through the Government's submission to the tribunal that the allowances should be simplified and capped at $30,000. That was my role - not reaching into public administration, where I had no role, and saying to one of our executives, "You should not be paid that entitlement". That, Mr Speaker, would have been inappropriate, unlawful and in breach of the basic tenets of public administration.

The Opposition is running the argument that Public Service processes have been undermined through my administration. They run that argument regularly, Mr Speaker. I think I can demonstrate quite the reverse. There is greater accountability and greater transparency. My support for reform continues. A decision taken in the recent restructuring of the Chief Minister's Department was to remove the Commissioner for Public Administration from the executive structure of the department. A part-time position has been advertised so that in the future the statutory office can sit apart from departmental organisational structures.

Let us take a step back at this point, Mr Speaker. We have been through these issues every day in question time, but I would like to remind Mr Corbell about the way that the temporary accommodation allowance works. The allowance comes under the public sector management standards introduced in 1994 under the Public Sector Management Act put together and passed in this place under the stewardship of the Labor Government. I have taken a number of questions on notice on these issues and I would like to provide a full explanation of these issues, including the background to the decisions.

My department has asked that it have the opportunity to fully research the issues. We have new staff in place now and they want to provide accurate information, but that cannot be done overnight. An enormous amount of time and lots of people are involved. I took the questions on notice, happy to provide the information within the timeframes allowed for in this Assembly, but that simply has not been good enough for Mr Corbell. Possibly, he wants a quick answer that has not been properly researched. I certainly hope not.

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