Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (7 December) . . Page.. 3897..
MR OSBORNE (continuing):
All our trips have been about gathering information and providing it to the Attorney - General. I hope he sees this report in that light.
Debate (on motion by Mr Moore ) adjourned to the next sitting.
MR MOORE (Minister for Health, Housing and Community Care) (8.06): Mr Speaker, I move:
That, unless the Speaker fixes an alternative day or hour of meeting on receipt of a request in writing from an absolute majority of Members, or the Assembly otherwise orders, the Assembly shall meet as follows for 2001:
February 13 14 15
February / March 27 28 1
6 7 8
27 28 29
May 1 2 3
June 13 14 15
19 20 21
August 7 8 9
21 22 23
28 29 30
There has been a significant amount of consultation on this. I have seen Ms Tucker's circulated amendment. Rather than getting back up again, I might explain now why we did not put Ms Tucker's proposal in the motion when her office raised this idea with us. The proposed sitting pattern includes the week of 7, 8 and 9 August. There is only a single week break then before the sittings on 21, 22 and 23 August.
Ms Tucker's office approached my office and said they would prefer to sit a week earlier than 7, 8 and 9 August. As part of the assessment process, we checked that with a range of people both in the Assembly and outside the Assembly. The general consensus was that what we have in our motion was the right way to go. We understand where Ms Tucker was coming from. There is an advantage in getting a two - week break. The downside to that is that it would shorten the winter break for some people and therefore make the winter break less flexible for them. On the other hand, we can see the advantages from Ms Tucker's point of view.
The government will oppose the amendment. This is an on - balance decision following wide consultation.