Page 843 - Week 03 - Thursday, 30 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We had discussions, as you are well aware, Mr Speaker, and made a recommendation that the secretariat prioritise the design, implementation and evaluation of the formal feedback survey for members. This was raised last year and took a while to get out of the starting blocks. As members are aware, this is now under way. It is a positive thing. There is often a view in life that you do not ask the customers what they want because you might not like what you hear. But you will only ever improve performance if you know what your customers like.
I try, as diligently and as much as my schedule permits, to go out and talk to my constituents and find out what their views are. Not always is every constituent enamoured of the policies of my party. Members of the government would be aware of that, as they are in much the same situation. But I do not think you can stay in touch with the needs of the people you are there to serve if you do not listen to their concerns. It is imperative that, when we hear criticisms on performance, we take them constructively.
I know that you, Mr Speaker, have great regard to that whole process and have given us a fair hearing on the issues raised. I am one who would like to see more progress. We have moved on from that era where we apologise for self-government in the ACT. This institution is here to stay. It is imperative that we operate it on a standard professional level that would be expected of an organisation that is legislating for a third of a million people and a territory whose government has a $3 billion budget.
The Assembly needs to be able to function at a level of professionalism and be resourced appropriately. I do not believe we are at it. There is a long way to go in some fairly fundamental areas. I will persist on that issue until I believe that we have got to that standard. The committee made a formal recommendation on one particular matter, but I would respectfully urge all involved to look closely at the matters raised because I believe they are reflective of broad opinions, even though we chose not to go into formal recommendation on many of those matters.
I have presented also a brief dissenting report. I know this is a little unusual, because I am the chair of the committee, but I have produced a dissenting report on one item. Precedent was established here some time ago where private committee discussions in another committee were aired in this chamber, and that was allowed to happen. I thought it was inappropriate. I am not going to fuel that practice, except to simply say that I do not believe that this issue was given adequate debate. When there is not adequate debate it leaves one who supports the sentiment with nowhere to go but to potentially write dissenting comments or a dissenting report.
The issue relates to the workers compensation scheme. This is a vexed issue in the ACT. The real issue of concern here is not just the issues I have occasionally canvassed about the appropriateness of responsibility and where things lie in terms of shared responsibility between employers and employees. The issue that I have is the very significant cost of workers compensation in the ACT.
There are various solutions which are not necessarily the policy of my party nor indeed of the government. It may relate to the method of payouts and it may relate to a host of other areas of responsibility. I am concerned in one respect particularly about the difference between the premiums collected and the payouts. There was a difference
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .