Page 2351 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We have also seen, and we discussed it at length, the covering up of embarrassing information in FOI. During the power station issue we saw the selective release of documents that were denied under FOI. We saw documents denied to the opposition under FOI which were then given to journalists because the Chief Minister felt that that might be in his interests—to tell a selective tale, to give a little part of the story.
If there was one thing the power station taught us, it was bad process, it was lack of accountability, it was lack of transparency. We were told that, having received a whack at the last election, this was a new commitment by the Labor Party to openness, accountability, consultation and all that goes with it. What we have seen at the estimates says that not much has changed.
The health minister was the minister responsible, prior to the 2004 election, for the promise not to close schools. It was the health minister as education minister at the time who said, “No, we will not be closing schools in the next term of government.” Six weeks later, they turned around. Six weeks later, after the election, she turned around and said, “Actually, what I said before the election was not true; I did not mean it,” or, “I have now changed my mind.” And they started closing schools, leading to the mass closure of schools in 2006, 2007 and 2008.
We have a health minister, Katy Gallagher, who has continued along this path. Prior to the election, she claimed that all of the plans were on the table, yet she was conducting secret negotiations to buy Calvary hospital. That is not all your plans on the table. All your plans are not on the table if you have made a decision, as she acknowledged, prior to the election that you want to purchase Calvary—make a major decision in relation to health care. You commenced negotiations in order to put this plan into effect, yet you sit there and you claim that all of your plans are on the table. Prior to the 2004 election, it was ruling out school closures. Prior to the 2008 election, she said all of her plans were on the table and they clearly were not.
We see this pattern of behaviour. We only have to go back. It has been with us for a number of years. Mr Smyth reminded me of the ACT Health budget estimates 2003 document, which is a public service document that is designed to avoid giving information in estimates. That is essentially what it is doing. Unfortunately, through the ongoing politicisation of the public service by ministers in this place, we see that they would like to see this kind of behaviour continue. This kind of behaviour that we have seen in the past is apparently being encouraged.
We do not have to go through it all. We talk about the blame game. In this document, this ACT Health budget estimates document, nothing works better than pointing out that an area of concern or attack is in fact the fault and/or responsibility of another. There is nothing like avoiding responsibility. The attitude to it comes right from the minister. Katy Gallagher said to us, when we were recalling, “It is not up to me to write your questions for you”—apparently unless you are Ms Burch; then it might be.
But we see this other one: always follow the minister’s lead; he or she will defer to your expertise as required. The minister is setting the lead. She said it very clearly in estimates. She gave us the attitude that she was not going to give up any information unless she absolutely had to, unless she was forced to. It is a good lesson for all
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .