5 December 1991
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
7759 ITQrqitlatur Aaarmb3 Thursday, 5 December 1991 THE SPEAKER (Mr Michael Barnett) took the Chair at 10.00 am, and read prayers. PETITION - CAR THEFT Seven and Five Year Gaol Sentences MR NICHOLLS (Mandurab) [10.03 am]: I have a petition couched in the following terms - To: The Honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned: Hereby petition that those people who are convicted of stealing motor vehicles should be jailed for 7 (seven) years with hard labour and a person convicted as an accessory to stealing a motor vehicle should be jailed for five years with hard labour. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that you will give this matter earnest consideration and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. The petition bears 154 signatures and I certify that it conforms to the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly. The SPEAKER: I direct that the petition be brought to the Table of the House. [See petition No 150.] PETITION - REGIONAL CM POLICE STAFF OFFICE Top Floor of the Old CIB Building Relocation MR TROY (Swan Hills) [10.04 am]: I have a petition which reads as follows - To: The Honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned citizens of Western Australia respectfully request that the Regional CJI.B. Police Staff Office be relocated from their present address; the top floor of the Old C.I.B. Building situated on the corner of Viveash Road and Great Eastern Highway, so that the Council for Voluntary Agencies and their member Agencies may utilize the top floor of the Old C.1.B. Building for their community based services enabling them to continue to provide their valuable services to the local community. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that you will give this matter earnest consideration arid your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. The petition bears 262 signatures and I certify that it conforms to the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly. The SPEAKER: I direct that the petition be brought to the Table of the House. [See petition No 15 1.] PETITION - BREAKING AND ENTERING, MALICIOUS DAMAGE TO PROPERTY Heavier Penaltiesand ParentalResponsibility MR NICHOLLS (Mandurab) [10.06 am]: I have a petition couched in the following terms - To: The Honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. 04768-16 7760 [ASSEMBLY] We, the undersigned: Believe the penalties for breaking and entering and malicious damage to property should be heavier as a deterrent to repeating the crime. We also believe parents should be responsible for under 18's debts or the offenders should be charged as an adult. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that you will give this matter earnest consideration and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. The petition bears 49 signatures and I certify that it conforms to the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly. The SPEAKER: I direct that the petition be brought to the Table of the House. [See petition No 152.] PETITION - JUVENILE OFFENDERS Cautioning Policy Review - Child Welfare Act Amendmtent MR NICHOLLS (Mandurah) [10.08 am]: I have a petition couched in the following terms - To: The Honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned citizens of Western Australia: Request the Parliament of Western Australia through the Minister for Police and the Minister for Community Services to urgently review the policy on "cautioning" of juvenile offenders which we believe has the potential to greatly escalate juvenile crime and we request that the following action be taken: 1. Section Eour of the Child Welfare Act be amended to include: a. First offence for stealing or unlawful use of a vehicle, common assault and wilful damage to property; b. Second offence break and enters, stealing from private property, and unlawful entry to private property. 2. Oral cautions not to be issued where an offence has already been committed. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that you will give this matter earnest consideration and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. The petition bears 40 signatures and I certify that it conforms to the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly. The SPEAKER: I direct that the petition be brought to the Table of the House. [See petition No 153.] REPORT ON THE MANAGEMENT OF GUARANTEES, INDEMNITIES AND SURETIES, 1991 Tabling THE SPEAKER (Mr Michael Barnett): I table the report of the Auditor General on the Management of Guarantees, Indemnities and Sureties, 1991. [See paper No 863.] PUBLIC ACCOUNTS AND EXPENDITURE REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT - AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT Report Tabling MR CATANIA (Balcatta) [10.10 am]: I present for tabling the Public Accounts and Expenditure Review Committee Report No 22 and the first report of the Auditor General for 1991. 1Imove - That the report do lie upon the Table and be printed. [Thursday, 5 December 1991] 767761 The frst report of the Auditor General examines the Treasurer's Annual Statements, departments and statutory authorities for 1989-90. The report examines the analytical information in support of the Treasurer's annual statements and reveals that the Treasury Department has adopted a macro approach in the publication of its report. it is crucial for proper financial management that the State's liabilities, commitments and current assets are known and assessed. The Auditor General has supported such publication and the committee endorses that approach. The committee has also recommended that the progress of the Treasury's publication and data collection process be carefully monitored to assess management performance. Performance indicators are needed in all departments because they provide an indication of whether the objectives of the department are being achieved at the least cost. Therefore, as part of the analytical statement by the Treasurer and as part of the continuing accountability process, all departments' performance indicators must be examined. They are then measured against the cost of achieving the departments' objectives. The committee's inquiry into annual reporting was tabled early in the spring session and focused on the performance indicators. That report revealed the effect of the official performance indicators on all Government departments and recommendations made were well received. The committee examined whether performance indicators could be audited to make management more accountable. The previous Auditor General said that he had difficulty in auditing performance indicators. However, the acting Auditor General, Mr Neville Smith, said that, in fact, performance indicators could be audited. He also said that generally audit opinions were not given on performance indicators, although he audited the performance indicators of the larger departments. He also considers that the extent to which performance indicators can be audited depends on the state of performance indicators in individual agencies. I refer to my original statement that performance indicators are necessarily sophisticated indicators of a department's performance and should be initiated within all Government departments. The new Auditor General has said that he will work in conjunction with the Public Service Commission and the Treasury to develop a framework within which performance indicators could be evaluated. In 199 1-92 he will comment on the reasonableness and accuracy of the indicators. in future years, and as criteria are developed, he will provide an opinion on relevance and appropriateness of the indicators to the Financial Administration and Audit Act. In other words, he has strengthened the view that performance indicators are necessary and that they should be official indicators of the performance of departments and of the cost these departments impose on the State in meeting their objectives. The Auditor General also reported on the Government Employees Superannuation Board's use of the common seal. In his report he stated that the put option for the Central Park development was signed under the seal on behalf of the GESB. The use of the seal had not been recorded in the GESH seal register and no details of that exist in the board's minutes. The committee examined his statements and -recommended that in order to ensure that this circumstance does not occur again a more str-ingent approach to the use of the common seal must be adopted. The committee sought information from the Chairman of the GESB who said that there was a commitment on behalf of the board that the seal would be used in accordance with the new procedures, but that they had not yet been initiated. The committee acknowledges that the current board members are fully cognisant of their responsibilities, but has recommended that the GESO adopt prudent commercial practices as outlined in the Corporations Law and the document "Company Secretarial Procedures". This document states that there should be a seal register where the registration of people, departments or actions needs the affixing of the common seal and that it should be recorded and numbered, for example, one to 50. It is absolutely necessary that wherever the common seal is affixed the register should contain the names, companies, organisations and actions to which the seal was affixed. Section 123 of the Corporations Law requires a company to have a common seal from the date of its incorporation or registration. This was also a recommendation of the committee. Section 219 of the Corporations Law states that the company shall set out on its common seal in legible characters its name followed by "Australian Company Number" and its registration number. The Corporations Law also provides a second procedure and states - (1) The directors shall provide for the safe custody of the seal.