Page 2116 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 22 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This report of the Select Committee on Estimates on the Appropriation Bill 2010-2011 has failed in a serious way to provide a credible analysis of this government’s programs and proposals. We have had severe criticism and analysis of the dissenting report but not of the government. We have seen major areas of the budget glossed over. Any evidence provided that was critical of the government has been sanitised. At times, when our questions to certain ministers were at the point of getting to the heart of the matter, the chair stepped in with her own questions and deflected attention from our line of questioning. This certainly protected ministers from scrutiny by the very chair whose duty, clearly, was to conduct analysis and scrutiny of this government through the committee process.
Thankfully, Hansard has captured many of these examples of the chair protecting the government. Others outside this Assembly who have taken the time to read the minutes of the various estimate committee hearings are also quite surprised at the chair’s attitude in the protection of ministers of this government from scrutiny. As has been pointed out by our previous speakers, this glossing over has continued with the presentation of the report by the chair, which turned into a critique of the dissenting report by Mr Seselja and Mr Smyth—the only two members of this Select Committee on Estimates who actually carried out their duty.
The duty of the select committee is to examine the expenditure, administration and policies of this government and all its agencies and associated bodies. The duty of the chair of the committee is to ensure that the members of her committee focus their attention on scrutiny and examination of this government. What we have seen in this estimates committee process is sad indeed. We have seen a chair castigating her own members who have carried out their duty as prescribed.
This morning every Green that has spoken so far has attacked the opposition. It is the opposition that is under scrutiny by the committee, not the government. What is the opposition under scrutiny about? It is about doing its job, which is to scrutinise the government. It is like an episode out of Twilight Zone, when we have a chair of the committee having issues with her members doing their job. We have not heard one word of critique based on this government’s budget or performance. We have had several ministers severely criticised by organisations for not meeting with them.
This was not an occasional issue with ministers. Minister Barr is just one example. In one morning’s sitting, we had three separate organisations that had the same complaint about Minister Barr—lack of access by his portfolio constituents. Even the ACT Education Union could not get access to their minister. But is there any critique by the chair who actually noticed these things taking place? The chair noticed and asked the same questions about the fact that the minister is not accessible. But what we get is criticism of the members who tend to criticise the government.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I endorse what has been said by all of the other speakers before me regarding the sad state of affairs when the committee chair has more issue with the dissenting members of her committee than with the very government that she is meant to scrutinise.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video