Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2009 Week 5 Hansard (1 April) . . Page.. 1737..
MR SMYTH: Mr Seselja is right. It is about, in the long run, respect for the Assembly. We seem to have travelled a small way. I am grateful for that first step in the great march to access to the budget papers. I look forward to the discussion. It will be interesting to see, when we get back here on budget day, what happens. But I do not think it is beyond the Treasurer to stand up and simply say—and I will give her leave to speak again if she wants—she will make it 12.30 or make it 12. Nobody can give a reason, nobody has given a reason, as to what is unreasonable about getting it a little early under embargo. And the reason they cannot do that is that there is no reason.
That Mr Smyth's motion be agreed to.
The Assembly voted—
Ms Le Couteur
Question so resolved in the negative.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Water, Minister for Energy and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (6.40): I move:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
I want to just reflect a little bit on the debate that has been bubbling around the edges in a couple of other matters today, in relation to the powers of the Assembly and its ability to direct the executive to do certain things. I note the most recent assertion by Mr Smyth in this discussion when he said, "You guys directed us to do certain things, and now you are being hypocritical."
It is true, Mr Speaker, that the Labor Party in opposition did support motions that sought to direct the executive to do certain things, and perhaps that is a function of the push and shove in this place, but that does not diminish from the opinions on this matter in relation to the powers of parliament, and therefore of this place, to do certain things.
I think it is worth just reading out House of Representatives Practice in this regard, where it says, under the heading "Effect":