Page 863 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 2 May 2007

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

had a glass of wine when they had the fireworks. I do not have an issue with that; I think that it is fine for that to happen. But we need to constantly be saying, “Is this the best way we can spend taxpayers’ funds?”

This is not an accountable, open, responsible government. Sadly, it seems to be moving further away from that—moving from the fundamental principles that my leader pointed out in his remarks. This government seems to be working on the principle that, if you close all fronts, if you close the door on information, you will be subject to less scrutiny.

One of the most poignant examples of this is the continuing failure of the government to release the now infamous functional review. This paper was prepared in secret and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. It has dramatically altered the lives of many Canberrans. Education was one area affected, but there were many other areas where we were financially hurt as a result of that paper. It may be that the medicine was needed. The Chief Minister keeps saying that we spend 20 per cent more than we should and that we expect too much in this territory. But if you are going to go to the people and say that they expect too much and have to pay a lot more, you also have a duty to be very frank about whether all of your expenditure was absolutely necessary.

I support my colleague’s motion. I call on those opposite to acknowledge their failure to adhere to the standards of good governance and to provide the people of Canberra with a guarantee that, as a priority, the remainder of their term in government is guided by the principles of openness, responsibility and accountability.

MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Business and Economic Development, Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Minister for the Environment, Water and Climate Change, Minister for the Arts) (4.45): I move:

Omit paragraphs (1) (b), (c) and (d), substitute:

“(b) the Government’s record of achievement based on its commitment to the Code; and

There is no dispute that accountability for public expenditure is fundamental to our system of government. It is public money that we spend. It is to the public that we account. Accountability starts with a sound legislative framework. As I explained yesterday, the government has quite significantly reformed the Financial Management Act 1996 to create that framework.

Accountability also requires a strong culture of transparency and, particularly when it comes to discretionary public expenditure, the policies and procedures to support and document financial transactions as they occur. Accountability requires that when policies and procedures are found to be lacking, as they will inevitably be from time to time, that lack is quickly identified and acted upon. And that is what happens.

That is why, for example, fast on the heels of the 2006 report by the Auditor-General into Rhodium Asset Solutions, the office undertook a performance review of seven

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .