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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (2 March) . . Page.. 502 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

The standing committee did raise concerns about the authority of the Assembly and the role of Ministers in determining the attendance of officials before a committee. The Government also recognises that the powers and privileges of the Assembly are significant. However, these powers in relation to the role of public servants require consistency with the values and principles and the administrative framework of the Public Sector Management Act 1994.

The Government has accepted the position of the standing committee that this type of document must reflect changes to practice and procedure. The current inquiry into committee evidence may impact on the procedural arrangements between the Executive and the Assembly. The protocol will require reviewing in the context of this inquiry report.

This protocol is important in defining roles and responsibility between the Assembly, the Government, Ministers and public servants. The Government supports the positive response by the standing committee to the protocol as a demonstration of the willingness of members to review and improve the management of parliamentary and related business matters.

MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (12.04): I have a few comments to make about the protocol and the Assembly committee report on the protocol. There was some discussion in the committee about the operation of standing order 240 and the question of the appearance of witnesses before Assembly committees. Standing order 240 states:

Quite what the degree of compulsion is that attaches to that is probably a matter for some debate. I do not think any committee in this place has ever compelled a witness to appear. I am not sure - if they did or tried to compel - what power they would have to enforce such compulsion. But there does appear to be in the standing order a power to direct the secretary to summon witnesses. Perhaps it is better if that provision is never put to the test.

The protocol does make reference to the following statement:

I think it is best to make reference to the fact that, when people have appeared before committees in the past, there has been some conflict between governments and committees about who it is that is to speak on behalf of the Government. There have certainly been cases where Ministers have appeared at, say, estimates committees or other committees and have had public servants or officials with them at the witness table and the Ministers have indicated that the evidence should be given only through the Minister concerned rather than through officials who might be there at the time.

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