Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 14 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 November 2005) . . Page.. 4453 ..

20 minutes for an electricity failure, and given that I have not been able to read the report, I cannot use this opportunity to speak about it with full information. That was why I was hoping to adjourn the debate.

I reiterate: the only thing that I can say, with full knowledge, is that it is not possible for me to debate the report, given that I have not seen it. It is very likely that the Greens have a contribution to make to this debate. I have been represented on the committee. Consequently, I hope that opportunity will arise in the future.

MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (5.57): I would like to say that I, also, share the concerns in relation to the report and the presentation by Mr Gentleman that had been outlined by my colleague Dr Foskey. We are presented here today with 11 recommendations on a proposed change to the territory plan. There are many issues that warrant consideration by the Assembly. It troubles me that the whole process seemed to be one of trying to rush things through.

We are told that this process of consultation occurred and various points of view were taken into account. The very concerns that Mr Seselja has raised strike at the heart of the process of our committee system. We have seen a changed direction this year. Although I am just now into my second year in the Assembly—

Mr Corbell: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Mr Mulcahy needs to refer to the report. The question before the chair is that the report be noted. As you have already ruled, getting into the detail of the motivations of members, the attitude of the government towards the committee system, is not relevant to the question before us.

MR MULCAHY: Mr Speaker, on the point of order: I did not talk about the motivations of members; I talked about the 11 recommendations and the process and the discussion we have had with—

MR SPEAKER: Come back to the subject matter of the debate, that is, that the report be noted. I have said before that it is fair enough for members to touch on performance of members of the committee, but the substance of the matter is the report, one would think.

MR MULCAHY: I will talk about the noting of this report, because it troubles me that our capacity to review, as thoroughly as we would like, the 11 recommendations that cover a raft of different issues seems to be being hastily pushed through. It is not an unreasonable view that Dr Foskey has advanced that she, and certainly other members, would certainly find it valuable to review these recommendations. Whilst the recommendation, in the first instance, supports the proposed variation of the territory plan, the report then goes on to raise a host of other issues. We did debate, on a previous occasion, legislation that relates to recommendation 6.

At 6 pm, in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for the next sitting. The motion for the adjournment of the Assembly was put.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .