Page 914 - Week 04 - Thursday, 3 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Because of the high farce of last year’s estimates committee and the carry-on, the opposition decided that it would try, in its commitment to good government and the good operation of committees, to solve the problems that arose for the government last year which ended up bringing the estimates committee into some disrepute. The offshoot of that was the appalling treatment by Mr Gentleman of the chair, Ms Porter, in meetings where he let fly with a huge range of inappropriate and unparliamentary language.
Mr Gentleman: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Mrs Dunne refers to an incident last year and says that there was an occurrence within the estimates committee that offended my colleague Ms Porter. I would like it placed on the record that there was no occurrence inside the estimates committee.
MR SPEAKER: That is not a point of order, Mr Gentleman.
Mr Stanhope: It is a fair point, though, when a member is actually misleading the Assembly.
MR SPEAKER: It might be a debating point, but it is not a point of order.
MRS DUNNE: The language used, Mr Speaker, is on the public record and admitted by Mr Gentleman.
Today’s motion is a further move by the Liberal Party to ensure the integrity of the entire committee system by allowing some flexibility in the hearing of evidence and for meetings of members. It brings the committee system into the 21st century and probably brings it into line with the practice of most other committees in other parliaments. I commend to members the spirit of the motion, which allows for the use of electronic technology so that we can continue to participate in committee inquiries when people, for whatever reason, are unable physically to be in the one location.
In future, it may be that when committees are deliberating on a range of matters, rather than the committee having to travel interstate or to pay for someone to come here to give evidence, they will be able to give evidence by remote audio or audiovisual link. This would be not so much of an impost on the time or the money of the Assembly and we may be able to get through more committee inquiries and investigations because there will not be so much time and money put into travel by committee members and by witnesses before committees.
On the subject of maintaining the integrity of committees, I would like to put on the record the motion passed by the ACT Liberal Party party room on 6 April 2005 that goes to the integrity of committees. It states:
Notwithstanding the numerical make-up of any Legislative Assembly, we, the Parliamentary Liberal Party, will always ensure proper scrutiny of any executive business by assembly committees and specifically the Liberal Party will not flout the standing orders or disregard parliamentary practice to avoid the scrutiny of major business, especially budgets. The committees would always reflect the make-up of the Legislative Assembly and the Leader of the Opposition’s nominee should always be the chair of a select committee on estimates.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .