Page 4118 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 13 December 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
despite Liberal members of the Committee being given copies to take away.
5. The Chair told me an untruth about access to the consultant’s report—she claimed in conversation with me on the evening of Tuesday 5th December that Liberal members of the Committee had not been given copies of it, and they had.
6. The Chair has harassed the staff of the secretariat, imposing completely unreasonable deadlines on them, as well as unreasonable restrictions on their obligations to other committee members.
I note for example that committee members have received emails from secretariat staff after midnight. Staff have been required to work excessive hours for many weeks. The Chair has also directed the secretariat to withhold information on a partisan basis that all committee members are entitled to, which has clearly put a great amount of stress on the staff.
The Chair’s unconscionable treatment of the secretariat staff is chillingly ironic, given that we are conducting an inquiry into work and family balance.
7. Labor members of the Committee are unable to receive secretariat assistance in preparing a dissenting report, because the Chair’s demands are already forcing staff to work around the clock. Labor MPs are not prepared to increase the massive burden and stress on the secretariat staff by asking for assistance with a dissenting report, despite being entitled to do so.
8. Labor MPs have been given a deadline of 2 pm on Thursday 7 December for a dissenting report or comments, despite not being provided with a copy of the final report. It is impossible to write a dissenting report without access to the report. It is manifestly unreasonable to be expected to write a dissenting report—
Ms MacDonald: I raise a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Under standing order 58, a member shall not digress from the subject matter of any question under discussion. I draw Dr Foskey’s attention to the subject matter of Ms Porter’s motion. It is not about the process that took place within federal parliament; it is actually about childcare. It would be appreciated if Dr Foskey would come back to the subject matter of the motion.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Dr Foskey, I will allow you to judge at this point. If you think you are drifting away from the axis, please—
DR FOSKEY: Frankly, I think it is up to you to make a ruling, Mr Deputy Speaker.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am not ruling at this point that you have drifted, but should you think that were the case—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .