Page 2294 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 16 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the named constituent—
I would be able to respond directly to them. Alternatively, a briefing can be arranged for you to address this issue.
Since March this year I have received more than 20 of these replies in relation to issues ranging from health care funding, waiting times in hospitals and elective surgery, funding levels for Canberra schools, specific programs in ACT public schools, and concerns over the size of classes. It is worth noting that both her predecessor, as minister for health, and her successor in the education portfolio have replied to similar representations for my constituents and the people of Molonglo with meaningful answers.
Ms Gallagher’s responses are unacceptable. As the Deputy Chief Minister well knows, it is not a requirement, or appropriate, to provide home address details to the minister without the constituent’s agreement so that she can simply bypass their elected representative, nor is it remotely realistic to receive a briefing on every issue that arises. On that issue, this year I have taken up more than 600 matters, according to statistics in my office, on behalf of constituents. It defies comprehension that any minister in this government would expect a member to make an appointment and have a briefing every time a constituent comes to him or her.
I have written to the minister expressing my displeasure at her practice and requesting that she abide by the convention of replying to representations made on behalf of constituents. Not surprisingly, my letter has not been acknowledged or even replied to in any way. Since I wrote to the minister on 29 June I have not received even an inadequate response to representations. I accept that this is a particularly busy time, but I note that the Deputy Chief Minister’s colleagues have responded to representations during this period. I am sure that all members, regardless of their political party, recognise that our primary role is to represent those who elect us to this Assembly.
Ms Gallagher’s decision repeatedly to ignore representations from constituents is unacceptable. I suggest that it is creating a very unhelpful perception of her approach to genuine issues that are raised by people in Canberra who come to their elected representative. In one way or the other I have been involved in politics for 34 years and I have worked in the offices of many members of parliament, ministers and a premier. I have never seen ministers of parliament from either side of politics treat with contempt legitimate representations from elected members in any state parliament or at the Commonwealth level. They always receive a formal response on the understanding that the member will be reporting back to the constituent.
I am sure Ms Gallagher’s decision to ignore representations from constituents will be widely seen as unacceptable by the electorate and by most members of the Assembly. I do not know whether laziness, indifference or a misguided belief that, as a minister, she does not have responsibility either to this Assembly or to the people of Canberra, is motivating her, but I respectfully urge her to improve her attitude and begin making meaningful responses to the very genuine concerns of Canberra residents.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .