 |
Other Parliamentary SpeechesThis page is dedicated to Peter's speeches during parliament that do not fall under Questions or Questions without notice. They range from debating legislation, reporting on events or issues in his seat of Southport and his Ministerial Statements.
Freedom of Information and Other Legislation (Appointment Accountability) Amendment Bill |
![]() |
| Posted by Administrator (admin) on Aug 10 2005 |
| Other Speeches >> |
Mr LAWLOR (Southport-ALP) (9.40 pm):
In his second reading speech the member for Caloundra suggested that this bill would standardise the procedure for appointment for these statutory positions. It
proposes to amend the Ombudsman Act, the Freedom of Information Act 1997 and the Financial Administration and Audit Act 1977 insofar as they relate to the selection process for the Ombudsman, the Queensland Information Commissioner and the Auditor-General respectively and would, he claims, standardise the procedure for appointment and make it identical with that used for the appointment of the PCM Commissioner. It would simply not achieve that objective.
The position of the PCM Commissioner involves national advertising for suitably qualified persons by the Speaker and the appointment of the successful applicant only if there is the bipartisan support of the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee.
The proposal contained in this private member's bill is not identical to the legislative procedure for the selection process of the PCM Commissioner. The bill also requires the chairperson and a prescribed member of the parliamentary committee to be members of the selection panel. A prescribed member of the parliamentary committee is defined to be the deputy chairperson, if that person is not a member of the party in government, or otherwise a member of the committee who is nominated by the Leader of the Opposition. The selection procedure for the PCM Commissioner does not include any requirement regarding the composition of the selection panel. The basis of the bill is, therefore, completely flawed.
As has been mentioned by several other government members, the appointment procedures for the Ombudsman, the Information Commissioner and the Auditor-General are currently being reviewed. That review was announced by the Premier in this House on 2 September 2004- almost 12 months ago. The Liberal Party is simply whipping up apathy and, as usual, is almost 12 months late.
The member for Maroochydore referred to the alleged winding back of the Freedom of Information Act by this government. How absolutely hypocritical! Winding back the FOI Act from what? Not the National Party FOI situation. We would all recall that the National Party did not believe in FOI at all. It did not have any FOI legislation. The member for Maroochydore claims that there has been a winding back of FOI legislation. That is completely hypocritical on the part of the National Party, but not much of a surprise really.
The member for Robina referred in an emotional way to one of my predecessors in the seat of Southport, Peter White, who died fairly recently. He said that, if I could walk in his shoes, I would be doing very well. I agree with him. I greatly admired Peter. I believe that Peter had a lot of time for Bob Quinn, but he had little time for the Liberal Party of today. After the dirty deal that was done by the opportunistic and hastily cobbled together coalition for purely electoral purposes before the last election, Peter White was not able to vote for a Liberal candidate in the seat of Southport.
I mentioned this in a condolence motion for Peter just after his death. I was actually letterboxing in Wildash Street, Southport at 6 am one morning. Peter was collecting his paper. We talked for 10 or 15 minutes. I gave him a pamphlet and commented as I went that I am probably wasting my time. He replied, 'With a choice between the Nationals and Labor you might be pleasantly surprised,' and I was.
Politically I do not agree with Bob Quinn very often, but I do agree that Peter White was a man of principle and a great example for me- and other members of parliament, I believe. He was not an uncritical fan of today's Liberal Party. So they should not kid themselves about that.
The member for Moggill referred to the member for Hervey Bay in derogatory terms for referring to a previously deceased Liberal Party member for Mount Gravatt whose condolence motion we had today. His own leader referred and resorted to the undoubted fortitude, character and courage of Peter White, but did he take exception to that? Of course not! In typical current Liberal Party fashion he resorts to the old backstop, the selective memory. He condemns one situation but condones the same situation because it involved his leader. What hypocrisy! I oppose this bill. Last changed: [PUBLISHED_DATE] at 12:00 AM
Back
|
|
