Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 10 Hansard (29 August) . . Page.. 3030..
MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):
original shortlist submitted by the ACT government for that report-or is there a third shortlist prepared especially for this exercise?
MR QUINLAN: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. First of all, if you look at the article, the ruling-out of anything was more a conclusion of the reporter than a direct quote of a spokesperson from my office, because my office has been non-committal.
As to the lists of sites being used, quite clearly there are a number of candidate sites. It would be getting close to the bleeding obvious that we would take into account and revisit those sites previously considered to be candidate sites, as we have done.
MR HUMPHRIES: In that case, if you have ruled out Symonston and Kinlyside, would you rule out Majura?
MR QUINLAN: Firstly, the short answer is no. Secondly, I do not recall ruling out Kinlyside. We did discuss the fact that it was zoned as residential. There were exchanges across the chamber with Mr Corbell-and rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb over there-as to whether the site was rural/residential or simply residential. I have, to this date, not ruled out any site other than Symonston.
Answer on land sales
MRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Planning, Mr Corbell. Minister, in question time yesterday you responded to my question about guidelines under section 180 of the land act with some general remarks, and an admission that you could not recall guidelines prepared by PALM in relation to combating land speculation. You then said:
I undertake to get that information to Mrs Dunne, hopefully by the close of business today.
That was yesterday. Minister, the Assembly rose yesterday at 5.42 pm and nothing was heard from you or your office. Yet, within minutes of the house rising, you were briefing journalists on the issue. Part of what you said was reported on page 4 of the Canberra Times, and on ABC Radio news at 6.30 this morning. I still have not heard anything from either you or your office on this matter.
Can you advise the Assembly if your action in briefing the media, before a member to whom you had undertaken to provide information, constitutes what Erskine May describes. I quote:
...any act or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which has a tendency ... to produce such results which may be treated as a contempt even though there is no precedent of the offence.
Are you in contempt of the Assembly?