Page 945 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 26 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
500 people outside this Assembly who are opposed to a casino.
We are told that CARD, the Canberra Association for Regional Development, suggested that people in Canberra want a casino. That is not true. They never asked Canberrans the question, "Do you want a casino or not?". That was exposed in evidence at the hearing.
The casino, as Mr Jensen says, will be no pot of gold for Canberrans. We will not get our bribe of three theatres and a library, there will be no financial bonanza, but there will be substantial social welfare costs which could negate any taxation benefit that will be paid by Canberra people, lower and middle income workers.
Debate (on motion by Mr Whalan) adjourned.
ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES - STANDING COMMITTEE
Debate resumed from 5 July 1989, on motion by Mr Collaery:
That:
(1) this Assembly acknowledges that the current standing orders were introduced as an interim arrangement pending full review by the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedures; and
(2) the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedures examines the current standing orders as a matter of priority; and in particular standing orders - 35, 61, 63(a), 65, 69(e), 108, 138, 189, 203, 272 and 275.
MR JENSEN (11.48): Mr Speaker, I rise to continue my remarks from the last sitting period - a sitting period that seems so far back in the distant past, I would suggest. That is one of the unfortunate problems associated with this type of operation. However, I will not detain members much longer on this issue. We must remember that it was moved at a time when we here on this side felt threatened by some of the Government's tactics in relation to the use of standing orders.
Ms Follett: Mr Jensen!
MR JENSEN: Sorry, Chief Minister, but I had to make that point. All I really wish to do is to comment briefly on some points raised by the Chief Minister and Mr Humphries. I refer to one comment the Chief Minister made about the changes the ALP proposed to standing orders in that letter that was commented on and quoted at various stages during past discussion. In that letter, one proposal was to remove standing order 117 because it provided "undue restriction on debate". That related to the rules governing question time. This move is clearly unacceptable to all thinking members and commentators on political
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .