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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (7 December) . . Page.. 3818 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

Obviously, the committee has a right to prioritise and to make decisions as a committee about what is the best way to spend the time and resources of the committee. We are interested in the view of the community about what should be our priorities as well.

After considering these issues, the committee wrote back to Minister Stefaniak saying that, unfortunately, we did not feel that it was something we could take on at that time. We believed that it was a national issue, because the teaching workforce is quite mobile, and an issue of national concern. That has been acknowledged by members of the federal parliament as well. We have had a series of letters on the subject. I do not have them with me today because I did not get to have the time, but Mr Berry can talk about the correspondence that has occurred between the committee and the chairs of the federal committees that looks at those issues. The committee took the request seriously before making its decision. As I said, it entered into correspondence with federal parliamentarians. After considering all the issues, we have said no to the inquiry.

I agree with Mr Kaine that this motion is another example of the arrogance of this government. When committees choose to take on inquiries and make recommendations, we often see them being ignored by this government - not always, but often. When we have a majority of the Assembly expressing its will to this government, the government ignores it. The government is now trying forcibly to impose on a committee a particular body of work. It does not matter that the committee has looked at such a request and said no. This government is not interested in that. This government does not care what the committee wants to do. This government says, "Do it. We will have a numbers game here. We will force you if we can." How that is in the interest of actually producing from the committee system work that has the support and enthusiasm of the committee involved is beyond me. It is really just about this government's arrogance.

Despite the fact that the committee has said no to the proposal, the government says that it knows better and will make a vote on this proposal occur on the floor of the Assembly. The government has the right to do that, but I do think it is being disrespectful to the committee and I am hoping that there will be support for not allowing the government to do this to committees, because every member of this place who is on a committee knows that committees do not want inquiries forced upon them and knows that it would not be a useful process for committees to have to engage in inquiries that they did not want to take on. That would be a silly process, so I am hoping to get support from the majority of members today to non - acceptance of this quite arrogant approach.

MR MOORE (Minister for Health, Housing and Community Care) (11.37): Mr Speaker, I have to say that I am somewhat gobsmacked at the notion that the government is incredibly arrogant when it seeks to get a majority view in the Assembly on requiring a committee to do some work that the government thinks is important.

Mr Kaine, in particular, spoke about the government imposing its will in disability services. That is not what the government is doing. The government is doing exactly what Mr Rugendyke, with Ms Tucker's backing, wants with regard to disability services: it is seeking to get a majority view of the Assembly that something needs to be done by a particular source. That is exactly what you have just done; so, everything that you have just accused the government of doing, you have just done yourselves.

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