Wednesday, 15 May 2024
Questions without notice and ministers statements
Integrity agencies funding
Integrity agencies funding
Georgie CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (12:07): (526) My question is to the Attorney-General. Attorney, the Labor government has been the subject of multiple adverse findings from Victoria’s integrity agencies, including the IBAC in Operation Watts and the Ombudsman in her report on Labor’s red shirts rorts. In this year’s budget Labor is cutting the budgets of IBAC and the Ombudsman in real terms. Given Labor is pushing ahead with the $216 billion Suburban Rail Loop, why won’t Labor adequately fund Victoria’s integrity agencies tasked with rooting out government corruption?
Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (12:08): President, I might just seek some guidance from you. The Attorney-General does not have responsibility for the budget position of IBAC and the Ombudsman. I have an administrative role in relation to talking to them about their operation, their legislation, but they are independent in terms of their budget, and therefore it is not within my remit. I do not sponsor their budget allocations. It is not my presentation to the Treasurer on their behalf. That is what they do. Having said that, I cannot give you a specific answer because you have asked the wrong minister. However, I can assure you that in my engagements with both the Ombudsman and the IBAC we ensure that they have the resources and the staff and the experience that they need to do the job that they are there to do. I cannot reflect on their specific budget allocation, as I have outlined, but I do have regular talks with them, and they have not raised concerns about their budget in the way you have characterised it.
The PRESIDENT: I will take that as an answer.
Georgie CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (12:09): Thank you, President.
Jaclyn Symes: I was trying to be helpful.
Georgie CROZIER: No, no. It is disappointing that, yes, you have got responsibility in some parts but not on the funding, and I will go to the point that –
Members interjecting.
Georgie CROZIER: Yes, yes. I get it.
Georgie CROZIER: Attorney, the facts are in the budget, and what has happened – the cuts are there. I will just put my supplementary, if I could. The government’s budget forecast is for inflation to be up to 2.75 per cent next year, yet budgets for the IBAC, the Victorian Ombudsman and the Victorian Inspectorate all fall well short of that. There is a question about why the government is cutting funding to the integrity agencies in real terms, so I ask: will you advocate on behalf of them to have that funding meet those inflationary forecasts?
The PRESIDENT: I struggle to put forward the supplementary given the answer from the minister that it is not in her remit as far as her responsibilities go within the cabinet. You can answer if you see fit, or you can do a point of order. My concern is once a minister says that it does not fall within their responsibility as the executive –
The PRESIDENT: I am happy to put the question; the minister can answer as she sees fit. As I said, my concern is once a minister says, ‘That doesn’t fall within my responsibility under the executive orders or the responsibility of the government,’ then a supplementary question in line with the same theme, or the same question, is hard to rule in.
David Davis: On a point of order, President, whilst IBAC is an independent agency, the minister has responsibility under the administrative orders for IBAC. The question here is: if the concept is that the minister says, ‘I’m not responsible. I won’t answer questions about these matters,’ to whom should questions therefore be directed?
The PRESIDENT: Mr Davis, on your point of order, it is not for me in my position to determine the responsibilities of each minister. If a minister’s answer is, ‘That is not my responsibility; the question you’ve asked me does not fall within my responsibilities under the executive orders or the responsibilities of the government,’ that is the answer. The only recourse that you have is to move to take note of the minister’s answer on the next day of meeting or to move another motion. That is the answer.
David Davis: Further to the point of order, President, the minister might answer, ‘I don’t have responsibility,’ when in fact under the administrative orders they are responsible to answer for that agency. It is just not satisfactory for a minister to say, ‘I don’t have responsibility,’ when in fact the administrative orders list them as having responsibility. They can say that the agency operates independently, but they can still answer questions about the matter.
The PRESIDENT: I think in this instance – and I hate paraphrasing members – the minister said that these are bodies that wish to have financial independence and be at arm’s length of a minister when it comes to their budgets. That was the answer.
The PRESIDENT: The minister is prepared to make more commentary, so I will call the minister.
Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (12:14): I kind of understand the position you are trying to put, but I am reluctant to step into the shoes of independent agencies who have budget autonomy. Although I have a relationship with the organisations, I think it is very important to keep that distinction, which is what I am trying to articulate in response to the question.
What I think concerns me about the way you articulated your question, Ms Crozier, is you are trying to categorise some kind of massive cut and impost on our integrity agencies, when historical funding, year-on-year increases and an actual increase in this year’s budget do not equate to the characterisation that you are trying to portray – that there is government interference and that we are trying to stomp on the operations of independent agencies. In fact our history, our record and our support of these agencies would point to the opposite.