Page 396 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 December 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
remaining $460,000 will be spent. I have contacted other groups, and they have said that they certainly were not aware that the $40,000 was coming out of the $500,000. So eight per cent of the additional funding will simply not be spent on tourism promotion at all.
I think we need to make some observations about the position that has been enunciated by the Greens with respect to this bill. Of course, they are willing to put all the words in the world on the table about increased accountability and transparency. Indeed, the convenor of the Greens said in this place earlier this week: “It is never a good process to pass legislation without scrutinising it carefully.” That is the opinion of the convenor of the Greens: “It is never a good process to pass legislation without scrutinising it carefully.” This is what we are going to go through tonight—something that is not a good process. And it is not a good process. It would have been easier to have a quick—and it could have been done quickly—estimates process through the PAC.
What was said seems quite clear. it is never a good process to pass legislation without scrutinising it carefully. But when it comes to the crunch, the government of the day, in this case the lazy Stanhope-Gallagher government, for five weeks, knew that they wanted this money but chose not to come back to this place. We offered to come back early if people wanted to deal with business, but no; it is now 36 days since they were sworn in. The government cannot arrange its affairs to ensure urgent attention can be given to matters on time. But the Greens collapsed. They wimped out, and they forgot about their commitment to accountability.
The Greens convenor argued in this place on Tuesday that in this bill they would put in place key mechanisms for next year. Well, what are they? It is not going to help us to get to the bottom of the detail of this bill. They said they would put in place matters to deal with the economic crisis. Well, what are they? The Greens convenor also said: “I believe the best scrutiny in the short term that we can offer on this bill will be here in the Assembly.”
Many of us will ask questions tonight, as we would normally do with these bills, and I would be surprised if we get any answers on the floor of the chamber to the questions that we ask. And that is the normal process. That has been the process for the last four years from this government. So we shall see. But I suspect we will all be very disappointed. Yet the Canberra Liberals know from their questioning of officials that there are many questions with this bill—with its intentions, with its structure, with its content. The final irony from the Greens convenor this week is that she said, again in this place, “I would like to note that I do not intend to allow this truncated process to be used as a precedent in future appropriations.” I am sure that is all well and good, but it is just rot. The damage is done. We are about to pass a bill involving $35 million with what I believe to be inadequate scrutiny, and the Greens are now compromising their principles on accountability and transparency at the first sign of a test.
The Canberra Liberals have been consistent about the need for appropriate scrutiny of appropriation proposals, and we will maintain that position. This bill is being rushed through the Assembly unnecessarily. It is unnecessary because of the laziness on the part of the Stanhope-Gallagher government to get their act together on the important
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .