Page 5104 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The government is concerned by the notion that these additional staff may be seconded from the ACT public service. The government received advice from the Acting Commissioner for Public Administration in May 2009 that such secondments would be inappropriate.
The acting commissioner explained that active participation in the development of a report commenting on and possibly criticising the government’s chief financial planning document undermines the effectiveness and the impartiality of the ACT public service. To this end, the government does not support the secondment of ACT public service staff to the Legislative Assembly to assist in the financial scrutiny of the government’s budget.
The government is nevertheless exploring, in cooperation with the Clerk of the Assembly, the piloting of a scheme which would see generalist ACT public service staff seconded to work in the committee secretariat on a regular basis. The purpose of the program will be to offer participants a professional development opportunity and to enhance the understanding of the perspectives of the legislature and the executive. I commend the response to the Assembly.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Convenor, ACT Greens) (3.09): We do welcome the government’s response to the inquiry that was done by the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure into the merit of appointing a parliamentary budget officer. This was one of the agreement items that the Greens put on the table to be included in the ALP-Greens parliamentary agreement.
It was the front part that looked at the sorts of reforms of parliamentary process and practice. It was an idea we truly felt deserved some investigation. We were pleased that that was referred to the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure. The ACT Greens lodged a submission to that inquiry. Part of what we were putting forward was around the idea that the ACT could be looking at models in other jurisdictions. There was the example of the Canadian model.
At the end of the day, we do accept that the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure investigated various models and considered them. The committee decided that in the ACT, because of the size of the jurisdiction, because of some of the constraints around the budget and also because of the fact that there had been, I guess, a new procedure tried during last year’s estimates process, which was to set aside some money to be able to get in a consultant to assist the estimates committee in that particular process, that was probably a good model for the ACT to pursue.
So I am just standing here today to reflect that this was part of the agreement, one of those items around reform. We acknowledge the work that the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure put into considering this issue. We thank them for that and we would be pleased to see those resources put aside each year. It is important around that estimates period. Estimates is all about scrutinising government, scrutinising the budget, looking at how the government is proposing to spend taxpayers’ dollars, and I think it is highly appropriate that resources be set aside to assist members in this place who take part in that estimates process.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video