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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Tuesday, 4 May 2004) . . Page.. 1703 ..

The one thing that stuck out in my mind in this process was something that ministers need to be reminded of—some more than others. Some have been far more cooperative and more forthcoming than others in this process. I found the Chief Minister to have done better than most of his ministers in this regard—and he should be an example to the others. I believe it is a minister’s responsibility to uphold the integrity of the committee system—and not only those members of the Assembly who are in other roles as the opposition, the crossbench and the backbench.

It is important that no-one attempt to undermine the committee process, particularly in such a small parliament as that of the ACT where the committee system is crucial in ensuring that the government is accountable to the people of the ACT. It is the obligation of all ministers to be cooperative and truthful, and to provide all material and information requested without hindering the committee process. This is an expectation, not a wish—it is part of our work. At times I and my committee have found the process frustrating but we tried to streamline the process as much as possible. I will now turn to the recommendations in the report. Recommendation 1 reads:

In future budgets, proper allowance is made for known or expected wages growth.

I will not go into this in detail. It was anticipated by the government that there would be an EBA negotiation process. It was felt that this could have been allowed for somewhere in last year’s budget. The report expands on that and I will not go into it any further. I know that Mr Smyth will go into this in further detail. I know that Ms MacDonald has a dissenting report and she will have her own comments. I would expect that of a government member.

Recommendation 2 reads:

The Government ensure that Wizard is compensated fairly for the services it has provided to the Territory in relation to the AIMS database in as short a timeframe as possible and in agreement with the independent arbitrator.

This matter caused the committee great concern. The committee was provided with a substantial amount of information. It is a pity that, when looking at an appropriation bill and going through the estimates process, we had to spend no fewer than 40 hours going over this information just to ensure that we were getting the understanding of this issue right. We did have a minister and his department come before us. We also wanted to give an opportunity to the vendor to provide us with information. The government had been dealing with it over a very long period of time.

The fact that it appeared that this vendor had been put in such a difficult position financially that they were basically expected to accept an offer—take it or leave it—was very disappointing to us. This vendor went into a contractual situation with the government in good faith and trusted that the department he was dealing with would honour that contractual obligation and, in the end, it turned into a big headache, putting a severe impost on this vendor. It seems to me that this matter should have been handled on a far more reasonable and timely basis. The committee recommends that this matter be addressed as soon as practicable and hopefully not to the ongoing disadvantage of this vendor—Wizard. Recommendation 3 reads:

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