Page 589 - Week 03 - Thursday, 15 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Pratt! Direct your comments through the chair.
Mr Stanhope: Well, your time is almost up.
MR PRATT: I have got plenty of time, mate—
MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Pratt!
MR PRATT: to cook you lot slowly.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Pratt, you will not have much time in here unless you direct your comments through the chair. Chief Minister, cease interjecting please.
MR PRATT: Mr Speaker, this demonstration today by these volunteers and the professional officers—
Mr Gentleman: Did you talk to them, Steve? Did you address them?
MR PRATT: Mate, I had plenty of talking. This demonstration today puts a lie to the claim that the volunteers were consulted by this government before the decision was taken to restructure. It puts a lie to the claim—and this minister does not deserve to serve a minute longer, because this minister has been saying in this place in question time, in speeches and on radio for about 14 days that the government had adequately consulted with the volunteers and the professional officers and that by and large the men and women understood the decision that was being taken and had been taken along with that decision. And that is just a load of garbage. We now know, from the turnout we have seen today, the strength of their concern, which puts a lie to your claim, minister, which puts a lie to your claim, Chief Minister, that you have bothered to consult with these people.
On ABC radio this morning at about 8.45 am, in response to a very good question as to why these decisions were taken and was the minister proud of or happy with the decision taken to restructure, the minister said, “Well, you know, the commissioner made those types of decisions; these are operational matters.” He said to Ross Sully, “These are operational matters and I don’t wish to interfere. This was a decision made by the commissioner.”
Getting back to your interjection, Chief Minister, this is exactly the time when a minister must step in. When a commissioner or a senior bureaucrat makes a very poor decision—and, with all due respect to Commissioner Manson, this has been a very poor decision—the minister must step in and exercise ministerial oversight. That is the problem with this minister: he is not prepared to accept his responsibility. With the $150,000-odd—I think I have undervalued that—that a minister is paid, he is not prepared to step in and accept the responsibility that he is paid for.
This is a reflection, a repeat, of what we saw in January 2003 when this Chief Minister and his emergency services minister, in the period leading up to the conflagration that we had in January, were prepared to leave it to the experts. And we saw this attitude reflected in question time yesterday. They abrogate their
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .