Page 1054 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 May 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
and the crossbench. I particularly want to underline our thanks to the committee secretaries, who have done an incredible amount of work in a very fast-paced, regularly meeting committee with a very large number of witnesses in a very short period of time. It has been working incredibly well, thanks to them. I appreciate that we have been reasonably demanding of our agenda and what we have been looking to achieve in a short period of time.
I appreciate that Ms Le Couteur has summarised most of the recommendations, but I add that many of them—particularly recommendations 9 to 14, 15 and 16—are very modest ones that could make a big difference and offer a really big bang for the buck. I look forward to the government’s response to these and I commend the report to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Public Accounts—Standing Committee
Statement by chair
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (10.51): Pursuant to standing order 246A, I wish to make a statement on behalf of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. I respond today on behalf of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts to recommendation 2 of the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure’s report No 16, Inquiry into the Review of the Performance of the Three Branches of Government in the Australian Capital Territory Against Latimer House Principles—9th Assembly. That recommendation is:
… that the matters raised in the Review in relation to the role and operation of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be brought to the attention of Standing Committee and that the Committee be invited to respond to the Assembly on why so few reports on Auditor-General’s reports had been presented. That Committee is also invited to provide its views on its preferred form, structure, membership and terms of reference for any future public accounts committee for the Assembly..
The committee considered the recommendation in its private meetings on 6 May. The committee notes that the review of the performance of the three branches of government in the Australian Capital Territory against Latimer House principles only reported on one metric: the number of Auditor-General’s reports reported on. It did note in passing that, at the time of reporting, the public accounts committee met more frequently and for longer times than other committees and had held more public hearings.
Neither the review nor the subsequent report of the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure considered what was in the pipeline at the time. One simple metric would be the number of active reports listed on the committee website. I hope that the Hansard can pick up the irony in my voice.
In this Assembly the committee has inquired into three very substantial Auditor-General’s reports, one of which has been tabled and one that will soon be tabled—that is, as soon as I finish speaking on this. The third will be tabled in or by
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video