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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 14 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 4437 ..

MRS DUNNE (continuing):

But that aside, we have a glimpse of the inner workings of this government that calls into question Labor's fitness to govern. For some outside this place, the workings of cabinet may seem arcane, but cabinets generally, of whatever persuasion, tend to follow the processes that have been established by precedent and convention for centuries. That is particularly so in relation to financial matters. Ivor Jennings, in his standard work Cabinet Government, says, and I ask you to substitute "Treasurer"where Jennings uses "Chancellor":

... no proposal is circulated to Cabinet until the Chancellor's consent has been obtained, and that the Chancellor does not give his consent until the financial implications have been studied and, if necessary, a financial memorandum also circulated.

We do not know how the Stanhope cabinet operates, but let us assume for the moment that it does follow accepted cabinet practice. On this basis, the Treasurer, on advice from his department, gave his consent. In giving consent, did the Treasurer consider the financial implications of his decision? Did he circulate a memorandum? If so, did he touch on the tight restrictions that are spelt out in the FMA in relation to the operation of the Treasurer's Advance? Did cabinet concur?

Mr Quinlan, on the face of it, has acted unwisely. Mr Quinlan, who on many occasions has portrayed himself as a paragon of financial and fiscal rectitude, seems to have acted imprudently. Not a single member of this government, not a single member of this lacklustre cabinet, raised their voice to question, not a single one of them raised their voice in protest. The world's greatest Treasurer and, as we have heard, the most popular government have been shown to be shonky. The government has shown that it can talk the talk of accountability and honesty, but it walks the walk of Khemlani.

MR SPEAKER: Order, Mrs Dunne! Withdraw the word "shonky".

MRS DUNNE: I withdraw the word "shonky". But it shows that it talks the talk of accountability and honesty, but it walks the walk of Khemlani.

Mr Speaker, on the evidence before us, there has been an abuse of process. On what we know, an act of questionable legality has been committed. The government may survive this abuse; it probably will. But it will, however, drag down the respect shown for this place. It will bear the opprobrium of having abused the most precious, sensitive and fragile gift that this public gives us-their trust. This government has shown itself incapable of accepting the public's trust.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism, Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming and Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Corrections) (4.43): Just in case we are building an atmosphere that the action taken was some form of giant conspiracy and hidden, I remind members that it was advised to the Assembly on 28 August, at which time I tabled, under the Financial Management Act, details of the expenditure of $10 million. I quote from Hansard, page 2640:

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