Parliamentary Committees

Budget and Finance Committee

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (16:30): I move:

That standing orders be so far suspended as to enable me to move for the substitution by motion of a member of the Budget and Finance Committee.

Motion carried.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I move:

That the Hon. J.E. Hanson be substituted in the place of the Hon. T.A. Franks (resigned) on the committee.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (16:31): I rise on behalf of government members to indicate that we will not oppose the motion, but I do pass commentary on the dog's breakfast way that the Leader of the Opposition has managed this particular process. Just to remind the chamber, the original position as discussed, which has been a longstanding one, was that this committee was a committee of five, which was essentially two government members, two opposition party members and one crossbencher. That has been its history for a decade.

In some initial discussions, that was our understanding of what the position was likely to be. We understand that eventually the crossbenchers were unable to come to an agreement in relation to one of two members who were interested in being a member of the committee, and the position that the Leader of the Opposition and the crossbenchers then negotiated was that it be a committee of six.

There was a discussion and one way of resolving that, because the alternative position, which I think the Leader of the Opposition put, was that the government would only have one member on the committee, was that there would be two Labor members, one government member and two crossbenchers. The position I put to the Leader of the Opposition was that that would be unprecedented. It would mean, given the heavy workload of the committee, that in the event that the government member was sick, absent or away, there would be no government representative on the committee.

We then got to the situation where we indicated that, alright, the resolution would be to move an amendment for six members, who would be two government members, two opposition members and two crossbenchers. Then, at the last moment, the Leader of the Opposition came and said, 'No, there are now three crossbenchers who want to be on the committee, so would you move an amendment?' or, 'If you don't move the amendment, we will move an amendment to make it seven members on the committee,' who would be two government, two opposition and three crossbenchers.

In the space of less than 24 hours, having gone from five to six and then to seven members at the last moment, the Leader of the Opposition advised me that one of the crossbenchers was now no longer either interested or prepared to serve on the committee and the Labor Party now wanted to have a third member nominated to the committee. I think, in terms of its new structure, this is contrary to the longstanding convention and practice that we have had but, as I said, the government members will not vote against this particular matter at this stage.

As I have indicated before, I am hopeful that there might be some sensible discussion between all parties about reform of committees in terms of the nature, structure and operation of those committees. There were productive discussions in the last parliament between the then government and then opposition. My understanding is that there is a willingness for those to continue in terms of a potential sensible reform. This particular arrangement of three Labor members, two government members and two crossbench members of a particular committee is an unusual structure of the Budget and Finance Committee.

As I have said, we will not vote against the motion being moved by the Leader of the Opposition on this particular occasion, but I do express my concern at the process through which we have ended up in this position. I hope that maybe, in the sensible discussion that might ensue over the coming months or so between all parties, we might come to a sensible resolution, not just in relation to this committee but also all the other committees that operate in this chamber, in the other chamber and as joint committees of both chambers.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (16:35): I rise to put some contrary opinions to those that have just been expressed. What I would say is unprecedented is that this Budget and Finance Committee has indeed been a creature of this parliament—a creature of an oppositional nature of this parliament—because this is the only parliament in the commonwealth that does not include the upper house in its estimates process. That is certainly something that, I put to the Treasurer, should be reformed in this particular parliament.

However, the Budget and Finance Committee has done an admirable job as a committee set up and, indeed, shared by the opposition for some 10 years, according to the words of the Treasurer, as a way of scrutinising the finances of this state. It is unprecedented for a member of the government to move to establish this committee and for a member of the government to think that they would control this committee. This is a committee of the opposition; that is, the opposition being the opposition and the crossbench who are not in government.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! Allow the member to speak.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: Thank you for your protection, Mr President. This is a process that we have set up in this upper house, this Legislative Council, because we are not involved in the estimates processes of this state parliament. Therefore, I think it is well within our rights to have established how we would like to see it run. What is unprecedented is that we have not debated the motion from the opposition leader, but that we have debated the motion from the government.

The government, of course, was approached by crossbenchers and members of the opposition with regard to reconfiguring this committee to change the numbers and to address the desire of crossbenchers and opposition members to be on it. The government refused to negotiate—that is why we are presented with the situation we now have. That is also unprecedented, because I would warn the government that, in this place, they need to negotiate.

The PRESIDENT: I understand from the Leader of the Opposition that he does not wish to sum up the debate.

Motion carried.

At 16:38 the council adjourned until Thursday 10 May 2018 at 14:15.