Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2006 Week 2 Hansard (8 March) . . Page.. 499..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

every document they want to table? If we have to go through that charade, like we did last time, I am quite happy to do so, because we wish to be treated with respect in this place in the same way as we treat you with respect and give you courtesy to make statements. It is all done by leave, Chief Minister: what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra-Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Minister for Arts, Heritage and Indigenous Affairs) (5.36): The government opposes the motion for the suspension of standing orders. Under the standing orders, we would be debating now, but for this move to justify a position, the provision of childcare in the ACT. We would and should be debating under the standing orders an important motion, a motion to be moved by Dr Foskey, on the provision of childcare in the ACT. That is what we should be doing now.

It is important that the affairs of the Assembly be conducted in an orderly manner. As a result of that and our determination to ensure that that is indeed how the Assembly and the chamber operate, it was agreed by all parties that the order of business today would involve in notice No 3 an important debate on the provision of childcare and it is very important that we get on to that.

The issue in relation to the particular suspension goes to a motion moved earlier today requiring Mr Pratt, Mrs Burke and Mr Stefaniak to table information by 5 o'clock today. At 5.35 pm, in clear breach of that direction of the Assembly, Mr Pratt now proposes to table the material required of him. It appears that Mrs Burke and Mr Stefaniak have not yet chosen to respond to the direction of the Assembly.

The direction in the motion of the Assembly was that Mr Stefaniak, Mrs Burke and Mr Pratt table certain information. It was the government's intention that that information be provided to the police. There is no need for further debate and there is no need for statements on the information. This is information that goes to bald statements made as allegations of fact yesterday and today by Mr Stefaniak, Mr Pratt and Mrs Burke, salacious allegations which went certainly to the integrity and the capacity of the ACT police.

The members opposite have every opportunity to raise issues in other ways and to make statements on these matters. It was in Mr Pratt's capacity to move a motion today in private members' business on the issue if he so wished. That is what Dr Foskey is to do in relation to childcare.

Mr Smyth: You hypocrite!

MR SPEAKER: Order! I will not tolerate that sort of name calling across the chamber. Withdraw that.

Mr Smyth: I withdraw, Mr Speaker.

MR STANHOPE: It is appropriate now that Dr Foskey's motion in relation to childcare in the ACT have precedence over Mr Pratt's need to seek to explain his quite vicious attack on the police yesterday in which he, as it transpires, quite wrongly claimed that the police had refused to respond to a triple-0 call in an appropriate time frame.

Next page . . . . Previous page. . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search