Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 01 Hansard (Tuesday, 9 February 2010) . . Page.. 115 ..
Mr Barr: That is a very bold statement from family values Canberra Liberals, isn’t it, really?
MR HANSON: Well, I will leave that one with you, Mr Barr. You are probably more conversant with the document than I. As I said, this was repeated to me by a third party, and I think that it was apt. It certainly draws colour and light and it is a good example of what the problem is with the ACT Greens: they simply move from one position—they seem to stand vehemently behind and they will argue their position—
Ms Gallagher: Is that a Kama Sutra position—standing vehemently behind?
MR HANSON: Can we ensure that that one is in the Hansard?
Ms Gallagher: Well, I do not know—
MR HANSON: Well, I do not know. I confess I have not read the document in question. I will—
Mr Barr: That is a bold statement to be making.
MR HANSON: It is, isn’t it? But I have not.
Mr Barr: So you are accusing someone of being something that you have not read.
MR HANSON: I am repeating a third party, minister, who may be more conversant with the document than I, but I think the inference is that the Greens seem to take numerous juxtapositions on issues, and I thought it was apt.
At this time of the day, it is good to have a bit of levity here, but it is a very serious issue. If we reflect on some of the issues that the Greens have moved positions on, schools were a very serious issue. The position the Greens took to the election was one of reopening schools—indeed, they chaired the committee inquiry that supported the reopening of two of the schools, those of the village communities of Hall and Tharwa—and then they backed away from that position, most disappointingly for the community. So the rhetoric certainly did not match the reality, once they had had the influence of Mr Barr imposed on them.
With Clare Holland House, we had the Greens initially supporting the government’s position on the whole Calvary deal. Then they did not know. Then they said, no, they would block it; they would not support it. And then, as late as last week, they were calling for an inquiry into palliative care in the ACT and were saying, “We will have to wait for that before we make a decision on what is going to happen with Clare Holland House.” So they went from supporting it to did not know, would not, and then again to: “We do not know. We will try and get a review.”
What we see today in the Assembly is the Greens again selling out. They had a position that they would back the community and support them. But, disappointingly, when it comes to the crunch, when it comes to the influence of the big brothers or sisters in the Labor Party, they change their position to one that is consistent with that line, and that is disappointing.