Page 1068 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 May 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
arguments persuasive and, on reflection, does not consider the complainant to have been unfairly dealt with by the Auditor-General.
In light of its experiences in dealing with the complaint, the committee recommends that the Assembly develop and implement a protocol for dealing with complaints against the Auditor-General and other officers of the Assembly. In this instance the committee, and indeed the Assembly, were starting from scratch, which is not an ideal situation.
Since we began this process, the strategic review of the Auditor-General which is required in each term has made recommendations that the standing committee in future deal with complaints against the Auditor-General as part of its normal program of inquiries. But the committee is strongly of the view that the committee should consider whether similar arrangements need to be in place for other committees and other officers of the parliament. The committee is firmly of the view that there needs to be a protocol, a set of rules, for how to deal with this because everyone was caught off guard.
The initial complaint against the Auditor-General was directed to the Speaker. The Speaker had no means of dealing with this and could not really refer it to the public accounts committee because it was an ongoing inquiry. For many reasons, there was a very unfortunate delay in dealing with this complaint. The matter I regret the most is that it could only be dealt with in the context of dealing with the larger inquiry. The complainant will, I suspect, feel aggrieved that it has taken so long for this matter to be dealt with.
Complaints of this nature are unusual and rare, but we should be prepared for future complaints. We have now had this experience, and the likelihood of a complaint being lodged against the Integrity Commissioner or the Electoral Commissioner or the Auditor-General should be countenanced. We should have a proper protocol for dealing with that. I commend the report to the Assembly.
MS CHEYNE (Ginninderra) (11.52): I want to echo the committee chair’s comments. This is a very high quality report, I have to say. The complaints were complex and were presented with a great deal of complexity as well. Dr Lloyd, and especially the chair, have done an extraordinary job of making sense of them in a methodical way so that anyone in the community or in this place can pick up that report and understand what the complaints were and how we have dealt with each of them.
It is regrettable that there was a time delay, but the chair has explained why that occurred. A considerable amount of effort has been devoted to this, in the context of the broader efforts around this Auditor-General’s report. I, too, commend the report to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Sitting suspended from 11.54 am to 2.00 pm.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video