Page 456 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 19 February 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


and some of these things are repeated as being factual statements, like the Canberra Times does.

Mr Jensen: It is called misrepresentation.

MR STEVENSON: Indeed, it is a matter of misrepresentation. I say that it does not do the Labor Party proud. It does not do credit to those members of the Labor Party who hold dear truth, honesty, and certainly tough debate, like the original members of the Labor Party who, I find, anyone could very easily have a lot in common with. It is sad that many politicians, simply to debate one side of an issue, irrespective of the truth of the matter, will get up in this Assembly, and unfortunately outside the Assembly, and say things that have no validity whatsoever, knowing full well that to be the case.

Self-Government

MR JENSEN (11.12): It is important to get in perspective a couple of final points in relation to possibilities for the future government of the ACT. Ms Follett made some comments about no-one asking her to participate in a form of government when she formed a minority government. Let me just read a quote in relation to the suggestion that the current minority government does not lead to stability in government. The Rally said in its submission that this:

... can be solved quickly if the established parties are prepared to put aside the strictures of the two party system and learn to work together with the other parties and groups in a way not seen in Australia in the past. Where there is a will there is a way and in this case the people of the ACT would be the winners and that is really why we all should have sought election to the new Assembly.

That is something the Labor Party was not prepared to participate in. That is why for that period of time we had a minority government and not the sort of government that I have just spoken about.

Assembly Business

MR COLLAERY (Attorney-General) (11.14), in reply: Mr Speaker, I rise to mercifully put us out of this debate. I will make a couple of comments. I fully appreciated Mr Wood's situation through most of today, and I fully understand why he had all that noise pent up in him. It was good to see him get it out; he could not get it out due to the factional problems of the Labor Party. He got it out at the end. I am pleased for him. I forget what he said, but it was a loud noise, and it was effectively delivered. But what was in it, I am not sure.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .