Parliamentary Committees

Budget and Finance Committee: Annual Report 2015-16

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (16:33): I move:

That the report on the operations of the committee, 2015-16, be noted.

I rise to speak briefly to this standard motion that is moved each year to note the report of the operations of the Budget and Finance Committee. Members will be aware of my views on the important work of the committee. I trust that, in some form or guise, it might continue post-2018—as a standing committee of some form or another, I hope. I will be surprised if whomsoever shall be in opposition post-2018, together with any minor parties and Independents, would not see the value in the work of the Budget and Finance Committee, whoever might be in government.

Certainly, my view is that, should the Liberal Party be fortunate enough to be in government after 2018, it will be a very useful and important discipline on the operations of governments, ministers, and, more particularly, senior public servants and officers in government departments and agencies, that the ongoing scrutiny of, hopefully, a standing committee of the Legislative Council continue to conduct its operations.

That will, of course, be a decision to be taken by whichever party is in the next government, but even if the government does not take that position, it remains the power of the Legislative Council, the majority in the Legislative Council, to continue the operations of this committee in the form that it already exists. There is nothing that a government could do to prevent the operations of the Budget and Finance Committee in exactly the same format that currently exists.

I thank the members of the committee who have served, the Hon. Tung Ngo, in particular, who has been an assiduous and interested member of the committee from the government side; always attentive and asking pertinent and apt questions on occasions. Occasionally the senior public servants want to know which side of the political fence he has actually come from. I think it demonstrates the importance of the work of the Budget and Finance Committee.

I thank the Hon. Mr Darley who has been, again, an assiduous participant in the operations of the Budget and Finance Committee. Without his contribution we would not have been able to continue doing the sterling work that the committee has done. I thank the committee secretary, Guy Dickson, for all the hard work that he has done. He should have been joined by a research officer, as a motion of this Legislative Council has called on the government of the day to provide, but Guy, nevertheless, has done the hard work and assisted the committee in terms of organising an appropriate schedule of witnesses, and chasing up answers for questions taken on notice.

I might just note that one comment I will make, in thanking Guy, but also thanking the members of the committee, is that I think there has been in the last 12 to 18 months slightly worrying trends for some agencies to become tardy in their responses to questions, and the committee has resolved that we seek responses within 28 days. I think the committee, when there have been many, many questions, has been reasonable in terms of the pursuit of that. I would flag that certainly perhaps the committee might resolve, in the not too distant future, to give some curry to one or two agencies that are snubbing their nose at the committee and, indeed, through that, snubbing their nose at the parliament, by delaying their responses by up to four or five months.

I would be hopeful that the Hon. Tung Ngo, in supporting transparency and accountability, would support other members of the committee—I am sure he would—to ensure that we are going to correspond with those agencies to remind them of their responsibilities. The advantage this committee has is that if it so chooses, and someone decides to be recalcitrant, it can be a quick motion of the committee to bring that agency back before the committee for another appearance.

It is unlike the annual appearance at estimates committees in the House of Assembly, where they appear once and they know that they do not have to come back until next year, and that is generally the case, except for the bigger agencies, with the Budget and Finance Committee. But I think if there were to be a persistent offender in delaying the provision of responses to answers to questions on notice, reasonable questions, then the committee would have the capacity to call that agency back to see why they have not responded to the questions, and to subject that particular agency to further questioning for a second or, indeed, a third time, if need be, during any 12-month period.

The Budget and Finance Committee has that flexibility, if it so chooses, and for the public record I put that personal view, at this stage, on the public record and I would hope that when the committee secretary, over the coming period, chases up agencies for responses that they will be mindful of the decisions that the committee has taken on behalf of the parliament in giving them a 28-day period to provide answers to questions on notice. With that, I support the motion standing in my name.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.T. Ngo.