Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 2 Hansard (1 March) . . Page.. 473..
MR SPEAKER: Be thankful that I didn't hear you.
Mr Stanhope: It was a very reasonable comment in the circumstances.
MR SPEAKER: Be careful, Mr Stanhope.
Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Mr Stanhope will need to withdraw as well.
MR SPEAKER: Gentlemen, we have a great deal of work to do today. It would be a great pity if several of you were not here to participate.
Mr Moore: Mr Stanhope needs to withdraw. He said, "It was a reasonable comment to make under the circumstances." He must withdraw his implication.
MR SPEAKER: I want you to withdraw too, Mr Stanhope.
Mr Moore: He must withdraw his implication that Mr Humphries lied.
Mr Stanhope: I cannot remember precisely what it was I said, Mr Speaker. What was it that I said-that it was reasonable to suggest-
MR SPEAKER: Just withdraw.
Mr Stanhope: If I said that it was reasonable to assume in the circumstances that the Chief Minister had lied, then I withdraw that.
MR HUMPHRIES: To answer part of Mr Stanhope's question-when was I aware of this minute?-I was aware of this minute as soon as it came to light, which was in the last 24 hours, I think. It does not change my view about what was discussed at that meeting at all.
There are two constructions of what those words mean. The fact is that the government's view about parking restrictions has been the same for some time. You need to ask yourself the question: why would the government agree to do something which it otherwise was not planning to do, when the same approach has been taken to supporting paid parking structures everywhere else in the ACT?
Those opposite can scoff and make allegations as they see fit. But I maintain the view that the approach we have taken is a sensible approach to this issue. Members might forget that we have two paid parking structures at Manuka-one at the end opposite to the one built by Mr Morris. The government, similarly, has a position of supporting that structure by trying to restrict free parking on surrounding streets, for the same reason: it impacts adversely on the residents of that area. Are you people opposed to that? I assume not. That being supported, I hope, by everybody in this house, it is appropriate for steps to be taken by the government to ensure that restrictions are placed on parking in the areas around such structures for the sake of the residents and for the sake of orderly parking in the territory.