Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 4 Hansard (18 April) . . Page.. 1067..
MR STEFANIAK (continuing):
You might pooh-pooh the idea of cabling schools. Yes, we will get around to it eventually. It does take time; you cannot do something like that yesterday. At least, though, you have a response there. It is happening. We have stipulated where, in some instances, it is happening. "Too slow, too slow", you say; you want it yesterday. How about the day before? How ridiculous!
Mr Humphries: What about 1989?
MR STEFANIAK: Exactly. What about 1989? What did you do in 1991?
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Stefaniak has the floor.
MR STEFANIAK: What did you do in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 or early 1995 even? Absolutely nothing.
Mr Humphries: It is convenient.
MR STEFANIAK: It is convenient, Mr Humphries; it is very convenient. Here we have the Labor Party supporting Mr Moore's motion. That is quite ridiculous. The Government, as I indicated, has considered its response. It has gone through the normal processes; it has gone through Cabinet. It has now been introduced into the Assembly. The step that you are proposing to take is childish and is ridiculous. You are playing politics; nothing more. You are not trying to be constructive or anything like that. There are a number of constructive comments in this report, Ms McRae, which, hopefully, even you might accept. Mr Moore had the grace to accept a couple of them.
Mr Moore: They can stay.
MR STEFANIAK: Can they? You like that? I am very glad, Michael. But this is quite extraordinary. When one looks at comments made by the ALP, their lack of effort and their lack of results in relation to our public education system, one sees that the hypocrisy of what they are proposing now is simply breathtaking.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Stefaniak raised a question as to whether it was in order to have this motion after the Assembly had noted the paper. The Assembly gave leave to Mr Moore to move the motion. Therefore, it is in order. However, members might like to reflect on this. I am advised that it is rare in the House of Representatives to give leave until you know what is being proposed. I mention that because Mr Moore could have been called upon, of course, to advise people what he was moving. Certainly, there is no question that he was given leave by the Assembly, and that is his entitlement.
Mr Moore: If I could just clarify that, Mr Speaker. I do believe that when I sought leave to move the motion I did clarify what I wanted to do.
MR SPEAKER: You did mention the point, yes. But I do mention that. It is entirely up to the Assembly whether or not leave is granted. Leave was granted and, therefore, Mr Moore was perfectly in order to move the motion.