Page 3862 - Week 09 - Thursday, 25 August 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
less significant portfolios do not already receive the attention that perhaps some of the larger portfolios do, given those extensive opportunities. It is perhaps an observation simply worth placing on the record.
I am pleased to see in the proposal put forward by the committee that the committee has taken account of the specific issues I raised with the committee when I met with it a couple of weeks ago. Through you, Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity, as manager of government business, to speak to it about these matters at one of its meetings. I thank the committee for taking on board the particular procedural aspects that the government was concerned about.
I am pleased to see in the proposed temporary standing order that there is recognition that, first of all, in terms of the roster, there is not a circumstance where the same minister is rostered on consecutive days. It would be unreasonable to ask the same minister to be rostered on on consecutive sitting days. I am very pleased that that has been taken into account by the committee, and I thank them for that.
Secondly, the other matter of concern for the government was in relation to when these rostered questions—to term the phrase—were provided to the relevant minister. I am pleased to note that the rostered questions must be made available to the minister by the commencement of the sitting day on which the questions are going to be asked. I think that is consistent with the spirit of the approach, which is that the questions are given with notice so that more detailed questioning is feasible, but obviously ministers are in a position to be able to answer more detailed questions about specific matters. That is a welcome development and one which the government supports.
It is probably worth making the observation, Mr Speaker, that there are some aspects that perhaps are not currently open to questioning on the roster that there could be. For example, committee chairs could potentially be included on the roster, or indeed you, Mr Speaker, as the person responsible for the administration of the Assembly and its appropriation. Those are matters that I think the Assembly should keep under review. They are certainly matters that the government raised with the committee when I met with them. I appreciate they have not been taken up at this point, but hopefully those matters can be given further consideration at some point in the future. With those comments and reservations, the government will be supporting the proposal this morning.
MS BRESNAN (Brindabella) (10.47): I will speak very briefly to this proposal. The Greens support the proposal that has been put forward. I would also like to thank all members of the administration and procedure committee for the collaborative way in which this has been dealt with. One of the important opportunities that this proposal will offer is that it will give community groups a chance to potentially have an input into the question time process because the roster will be available. I think it is a good thing, too, to give ministers notice of when they will be required to answer questions. Community groups might have some questions on particular portfolios which they can pass on to members. I think that will be one of the positives of this proposal.
Just to reiterate, the Greens support this proposal and look forward to seeing how it goes forward. As Mr Hargreaves said, if there are any issues that come up I think we
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video