Page 2696 - Week 09 - Thursday, 8 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I think one of the great strengths of the Assembly is that we have never been overly constrained by historical trends. If there are matters that need to be discussed, tweaks that need to be made to the standing orders, adjustments or clarifications, then let us have that discussion; let us discuss the specific concerns. But there is nothing to stop the committee doing the basic function it needs to do, which is to monitor the activities of the executive, to scrutinise proposed legislation, to examine public policy issues in a more detailed way, albeit a less formal atmosphere.
I should turn to some of the specific remarks that Mr Hanson directed my way during this debate. I do offer my apologies, Mr Hanson, if you somehow felt snubbed by the lack of a formal response to your letter. We have discussed this informally on various occasions. I said to you I had received the letter and I had been giving it some contemplation. I had not realised you were seeking a formal, written response. You had indicated you intended to bring this to the floor of the Assembly. So I assumed we would have more than ample opportunity to discuss the matter. If I have made an oversight in failing to send you a formal letter, I do offer an apology, given the distress that it has evidently caused you.
I think it was interesting the way that Mr Hanson spoke of Ms Le Couteur’s tweet. I had not actually seen it prior to Mr Hanson mentioning it, but I have had a look at it. I think he has certainly chosen to interpret it in a particular way. I think Ms Le Couteur’s reflection was that we would actually be better to have more people on the crossbench. Then we would have a better committee function. Unfortunately, we are going to have to wait for a bit over three years for that to happen. But Mr Hanson certainly interpreted Ms Le Couteur’s tweet in the way that he chose to.
I think there was also some suggestion that I should be represented on the committees. That is just not possible. Even if I was not in the executive, I do not think it is realistic to be on six committees in one Assembly. The companion—and I cannot remember whether it is in the Clerk’s advice to Mr Hanson or not, but it is certainly in the companion—reflects on the fact that during some of the previous Assemblies members were put in very difficult positions. There were only one or two backbenchers from one of the older parties and they were required to be representative of many. It actually got to a stage where in one of the Assemblies the Liberal Party Speaker was actually on a standing committee to make up the numbers. I am not sure that that is where we quite want to get to either. I know the consternation that Mr Hanson had with my role last Assembly and I cannot imagine he would want a Speaker on a standing committee. I just do not think it is realistic.
The bottom line is that I have agreed to take a role in the executive. So I do not think it is appropriate as a minister to regularly be represented on committees either. I am sitting on the administration and procedure committee, because that very much goes to the running of the Assembly. We have seen the odd exception. I spoke earlier of the costings committee that Mr Barr sat on. I think that was quite appropriate. It was a select committee and there was a specific role there for the Treasurer. I think it very much added to the process.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video