Page 1554 - Week 05 - Thursday, 15 May 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
appearing before a privileges committee for a technical breach of the standing orders. I do not think that is what anybody in this place has in mind.
All I am seeking to have the committee explore here is the practical and realistic issue of the fact that there needs to be scope for people to talk about the tactical issues around committees, which is what the issue really was the other day. The other day we saw a lot of heat and light in here about what Mr Corbell had done, and various accusations were made. But I want to be clear: as I indicated on Tuesday, I saw little evidence that privilege had been breached. I heard a lot of conjecture about what might have happened, but there were also denials from all of the people involved about disclosing the sort of confidential information about the committee that they should not have disclosed.
This is about working within practical constraints, not about coming in here and being all high and mighty about the sorts of things that Mr Smyth has suggested today. I look forward to a discussion about this in administration and procedures. Hopefully, we can have a good practical discussion about the realities of the way this place works, and come up with a good set of rules that reflect the practical situation so that there is clarity around practice versus the rules on paper.
I commend the motion to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Executive members’ business—precedence
Ordered that executive members’ business be called on.
Officers of the Assembly Legislation Amendment Bill 2014
Debate resumed from 10 April 2014, on motion by Mr Rattenbury:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.57): The opposition will support the Officers of the Assembly Legislation Amendment Bill 2014. This bill fixes the Officers of the Assembly Legislation Amendment Bill 2013 passed in October last year that created unintended inconsistencies in relation to the Auditor-General.
From 1 July 2014 the current legislation, through the Financial Management Act 1996 and the Auditor-General Act 1996, would require both the Speaker and the Standing Committee on Public Accounts to transmit to the Treasurer the recommended appropriation for the Auditor-General in each ACT budget cycle. This bill clarifies that it will be the Speaker alone who performs that role, in consultation with the relevant committee.
The 2013 bill provided for similar arrangements for the Office of the Legislative Assembly, the ACT Ombudsman and the Electoral Commission. However, the inconsistency in this bill is clarified so that it does not exist for these agencies.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video