Page 2226 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 6 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
WATER SUPPLY (CHEMICAL TREATMENT) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1990
Debate resumed from 31 May 1990, on motion by Mr Humphries:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR BERRY (5.36): I should say first of all that the Labor Party will be supporting this Bill, but in addition to that I think it is appropriate to speak further in relation to the matter. It is sad for this Assembly that there has been debate about such an issue in the early stages of this Assembly and that that debate has brought so much discredit to this Assembly.
Most of the parties have come into this Assembly with no policy relating to fluoride. Members of the Residents Rally party had a policy to remove fluoride from the water supply. It was unique on their part and they felt bound by it. However, one could argue that feeling bound by policies as far as the Residents Rally is concerned is of little relevance when it comes to the introduction of them because they seem happy to jettison policies by whim. Mr Speaker, the Abolish Self Government Coalition had only one public policy, and we all remember the song, "A is for Abolish" - - -
Mr Moore: There was a better tune in the rendition. Also, they had voters' veto.
MR BERRY: Well, it was never one of their policies, as I remember, in the jingle. I cannot remember, for example, "R is for removal of fluoride". The issue is pretty clear. Of course, the No Self Government Party had no policies really beyond their name but, like every other thing to do with that party, we have found all the skeletons have come to bother us.
Mr Jensen: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker, on relevance.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Jensen. I would ask you to get to the main issue, Mr Berry.
MR BERRY: Well, Mr Speaker, I will do that, but the history of debate on this issue is entirely relevant to the debate and to their support of the Water Supply (Chemical Treatment) (Amendment) Bill 1990. Of course, that party did not believe in self-government but it accepted various positions within the Government, and of course later a ministry. Then it later changed its name when the farcical position which - - -
Mr Jensen: On a point of order, Mr Speaker; I refer to standing order 62, dealing with tedious repetition.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .