Page 706 - Week 02 - Thursday, 10 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
in which to analyse that budget and then to prepare a report. We believe the committee should have the maximum time allowed to be able to do that work.
I will speak in favour of Ms Hunter’s amendment. We have had this argument put forward by Mr Smyth making some very disparaging comments first off about Ms Hunter. We seem to have this argument continually peddled about somebody is working harder than other members. It is a load of rubbish. We all work hard, and I think we are all getting sick of hearing that argument. Everyone works hard on that committee. The spokespeople take part in the estimates hearings, and everybody works hard in the estimates process, and generally. Those sorts of arguments are just ridiculous.
I find it extraordinary that we have heard this argument that somehow this process would lessen scrutiny. Ms Hunter has put forward a process to increase the scrutiny of a budget, because it would be put forward to the standing committees which analyse budget allocations and spending and programs throughout the year through annual reports hearings and inquiry processes. You would actually have people who have a much more intimate and detailed understanding of these programs analysing them. This process, as has been shown, actually increases scrutiny of the budget process.
We have heard Mr Smyth put his arguments about how the Greens do not want to scrutinise the budget—the usual arguments. Here is a process that actually increases that scrutiny, and the Liberal Party are going to vote against it. It is worth making that point. I commend Ms Hunter for putting forward this amendment and for trying to put forward a process that would actually improve the analysis of the budget. It is disappointing that we have not received support from either the government or the opposition on this.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Deputy Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Health and Minister for Industrial Relations) (10.37): The government considered quite extensively the Greens’ proposal around moving the estimates process to the standing committees. Certainly from my point of view, looking at it objectively, I thought there were a number of potential improvements to the estimates process by pursuing that line. The issue comes down to the number of non-executive MLAs, as my colleague Minister Corbell has said, and the fact that they are spread so thinly over a number of committees.
The government remains open to ideas on how to improve the estimates process. Perhaps when the Assembly matures and grows into a larger beast, something like Ms Hunter’s suggestion could be considered, when we have more members available to do that work. I also take Ms Bresnan’s point around the race to see who is working the most hard on the estimates committee.
Mrs Dunne: I think “hardest”.
MS GALLAGHER: Thank you Mrs Dunne—always there to correct someone’s grammar. It is fair to say that, in a parliament of 17 members, every member works hard on the budget, whether it be the executive through putting the budget together or non-executive members participating in the estimates process, and then for the 17 or so hours of debate in this place—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video