Page 785 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 1 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
20 kilometres of shelving of departmental public records, that is quite a challenge to undertake. We understand that there needs to be an extra year added to the project and we therefore commend the amendment bill.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (5.54): While it would be churlish to oppose the passing of this amendment, I would ask the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services to explain why our government departments do need another year to fully comply with this act, particularly in light of the funds spent by Mr Hargreaves’s department on consultants to assist with its implementation. In 2003, former urban services minister Bill Wood told the Assembly that his department had allocated $35,888 to Stuartfield House Consulting Group for assistance with the implementation of the Territory Records Act. At the same time, he listed 10 other contracts given to consultancy firms by his department for a total of $125,000.
From the limited information provided to me by the office of his successor, Mr Hargreaves, it seems that each of these contractors was also engaged to help the government get its records in order. That means that the government has spent over $160,000 already on getting itself ready for this act to come into effect. Why, then, is Mr Hargreaves requesting another year on top of the five years they have already had, particularly when they have had so much help at such a cost to taxpayers?
I do understand that this is an enormous task and that it needs to be managed carefully to ensure that sensitive and private information is not inadvertently released but, leaving aside the fact that the government has already had five years to put in place the necessary safeguards, what exactly did these expensive consultants do, if not assist with that? It seems to me that either the government has wasted thousands of taxpayer dollars on unhelpful consultancies or it is simply dragging its feet when it comes to meeting its commitment to make the territory’s records public.
I will not be opposing this amendment, but I do feel that the government has some questions to answer as to why it is necessary to extend the time frame for this act.
MR HARGREAVES (Brindabella—Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Housing, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (5.56), in reply: I thank the opposition for their support and their understanding. I think that this is really a reasonable thing for them to do. I thank Dr Foskey for her vociferous support for this piece of legislation. I only wish that, when she has concerns with legislation that has been tabled in this place for some time, she would contact my office. We would be happy to give her a briefing on any issue that gives her some concern. This is the second piece of legislation for which we have seen a classic case of ineptitude and laziness in this place.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .