Page 2377 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
three themes that occur in this document. Firstly, we see no plan. Secondly, we see the politicisation of process. Thirdly, we see the absence of strategies to achieve.
It is interesting that Mr Hargreaves had a different view on the questions. He said on ABC radio last Friday: “It is not so that the questions in fact were trivial, I believe; I think they were quite reasonable questions.” So there we have it—the politicisation of the process. When you do not want to answer questions, you simply attack. Mr Hargreaves clearly thought that it was fine to ask the questions.
On the day we discussed this report, 16 per cent of the questions had been answered; by Monday morning, when the report was recorded, it had jumped to 35 per cent. Of course, at that stage it was impossible to take into account what was said. Time had run out. The government had denied the committee the time they needed to do their work.
Recommendation 14, on page 15 of the report, talks about the Auditor-General’s funding. If you want to have openness and accountability, the key agency to achieve that is a well funded, well resourced Auditor-General’s office. The recommendation says:
The Committee recommends that the Auditor-General’s funding allocation be increased to allow for the target number of performance audits to be reached without running a deficit.
The Auditor-General is now faced with choices, because of the Stanhope government, that will not allow her to do her job properly.
Mr Speaker, when we move through the recommendations there, I note that the Treasury chapter is quite long. Indeed, unlike previous Treasurers, who only turned up for half a day to discuss Treasury matters, this Treasurer put aside a full day. The Treasury section runs from page 17 to page 34. It is quite a comprehensive chapter; perhaps Ms Burch missed that as well. There are some important recommendations. There is recommendation 17: the committee recommends that the government provide substantiation on how they will return the budget to surplus within the seven specified years. There is recommendation 18:
The Committee recommends that the ACT Government immediately commence the development of a policy framework that will provide encouragement for the growth of the private sector in the ACT.
Recommendations 18, 19 and 20 all talk about the economic outlook.
So the work was done. It is a comprehensive document. Perhaps others should pay more attention.
All of the ministers were called to account in this document; all of the ministers have things to answer for. Mr Stanhope should come back to this place. When he reads this section that is relevant to him and the recommendation, he should come back to this place and apologise for the discourtesy that he has shown a committee established by this Assembly.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .