Chief Minister Kate Carnell is not showing enough contrition. She has been censured by the Assembly, but she is not giving much indication that she proposes to change the way she conducts the processes of government. No-one expects her to change her personal style; that is part of her voter appeal. She is active, vivacious, participatory and proud of Canberra and Canberrans.
But the Bruce Stadium redevelopment is an example of her Government’s relentless pursuit of outcomes irrespective of process. The stadium, the hospital implosion, Section 41 Manuka and Kinlyside are the four prime examples.
On ABC Radio 2CN yesterday she said she felt neither reprimanded or victorious, but concentrated on “”getting on with the job” – “”health, education, the issues that make a difference to people’s lives”. That is all very well, but what about the changing the way government is done.
Asked about what lessons she had learned, Mrs Carnell mentioned she had reviewed “”the Financial Management Act right across government to ensure that these sorts of technical breaches don’t happen in the future”.
On the censure she said that censures happened quite regularly in the Assembly, but she said she took it seriously.
But there was no mention either in the Assembly or outside it of changing the way government is done. Rather the no-confidence motion was dismissed as a personal attack and Opposition harping over a technical breach.
Mrs Carnell imagines that if the Opposition continue attacks over questions of accountability and process of government, they will stay in Opposition. That is a misjudgment. Mrs Carnell was right to say that there should not have been a change of government because Labor’s vote was dismal last time and it did not deserve to govern. But she is wrong to imagine that all she needs to do is fix some technical breach and she can carry on as if nothing has happened. If she does, people will find Labor’s approach to development matters more attractive, once they put some flesh on the initial bones of a policy that MLA Simon Corbell put out a week ago.
Mrs Carnell is right to concentrate on jobs, health and education and she can take some satisfaction over the ACT’s high employment participation rate and low unemployment. But that does not mean she can continue to push through projects while ignoring legitimate concerns of those affected. The Government’s treatment of the small businesses in Manuka over Section 41 and its treatment of the Hall residents over Kinlyside is not acceptable. After a while they catch up. They also fester. Without some significant change in processes and a promise for greater openness to the public and the Assembly, the Bruce Stadium matter will not be closed. Independents Paul Osborne and Dave Rugendyke will revisit it in the form of a no-confidence motion later in the year, even if Labor does not.
Moreover, despite statements to the contrary, the other five Liberals might rethink their commitment to a one-out all-out approach to any further no-confidence motion over Bruce.
Wednesday’s censure motion requires more than a retrospective fix of the Bruce funding. It requires a difference approach by the Government with respect to all major development projects.
It may well be that the court of the Assembly is not too concerned about that, at least as far as Mr Rugendyke and Mr Osborne are concerned. But there is also a court of public opinion to which the Government will be answerable in October 2001.
Before that, though, Mr Rugendyke has shown a new capacity to be his own man and to be willing to scrutinise the conduct of Mrs Carnell and the Government. They are not out of the woods yet.