Page 2657 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 23 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
to—indeed, everybody I have spoken to, other than those on the benches opposite—have seen it is a threat. So I agree with Mrs Dunne: it is now for the Chief Minister to come down, apologise and correct the record.
Certainly, what message is the Chief Minister sending to the public service? We talk about the independence of the public service, and indeed there was much debate about this last week. What message is the Chief Minister sending to the public service? What he is saying is “If you criticise me, or if you criticise my government, then I’ll cut your funding.” We talk in this place about the independence of the public service, and we heard so much of it from the government last week when we were debating the issue of privilege—so much about the independence of the public service. And then, two days later, we have the Chief Minister going out and intimidating a public servant who has tried to question, tried to illuminate some problems within one of his departments. It is absolutely remarkable.
I turn now to the comments that have been made by the Greens, both in this chamber and also in the estimates report. If you follow though the estimates report, you will see a number of criticisms that have been made throughout, that the Greens have signed up to, that the crossbench have signed up to, and indeed they seem concerned about the funding that has been provided for the Auditor-General. They have also raised concerns to date—significant concerns—about Mr Stanhope’s comments.
I would contend that this is a test of the crossbench. This party have been elected on a platform of accountability and government accountability. It has been a major part of what they have talked about—we have all heard about third-party insurance, we have heard about scrutiny and accountability—and what they will do to ensure that this government is accountable. So where do they stand on this issue? I think it is time for the Greens to let us know. Will they be giving support to the government on this line item? Will they be voting for it? Will they be saying, “Yes, we’ve got some problems; the Auditor-General is being intimidated; the Auditor-General is being threatened; the Auditor-General’s funds are being cut inappropriately”? But, ultimately, when it comes to the test, when it is time for them to stand up and be counted, what will they do? It will be very informative today to see what the Greens will do in this place.
This is the point—and you get to these points, I guess, in a democratic process—where you do come to a bit of a crossroads. If you get to a crossroads and a point where the Chief Minister has threatened and intimidated the independent auditor, the judge, and the Greens decide that that is okay—if we have a position where in the estimates report they have said that they are not happy about the lack of funding for the Auditor-General and the implications that that has on the number of audits—what are they going to do about that? For them just to essentially roll over and let that go through I think would be disappointing, and we wait to see what the Greens will stand up for.
Ms Bresnan: So would you give the Auditor-General no funding?
MR HANSON: In conclusion, though, it is clear to see what has happened here.
Ms Gallagher: You’re going to vote against the budget?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .