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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 03 Hansard (Wednesday, 17 March 2010) . . Page.. 1025 ..


legislation, which surprises me because I know that Amanda Bresnan voted for this legislation for RDT at the Tuggeranong Community Council. When a show of hands was asked for, as to who supports RDT in the community, everybody put their hands up. I believe that she supported it then. She can correct that—or we could have had that debate, if we were going to be debating it today.

The point is that the Canberra Liberals put forward very similar legislation in this place five years ago, and I tabled this bill over three months ago. I agreed to delay the debate, and it is time for the Greens to make a decision. They have done nothing constructive to engage in this debate and actually to provide any substantive recommendations or amendments to my bill if they think there are any errors.

If they think there is any problem with my bill then they should let me know. Have they had any comments from the community saying that there are any problems with the bill? I have not. All I have received from the community is: “Well done, the Liberals, for putting this on the table. Let’s get on with it.” That is the unanimous response I have had from everyone. Can you tell me that you have had anything different? If you do then let me know. Tell me what your criticisms are with the bill if you have any, because I look forward to your amendments.

So why don’t we debate this bill today? What a shame that we have not had that opportunity. Why didn’t we vote on it and start the ball rolling? If someone wanted to come forward with amendments at a later date, there is a six-month period before the bill would be enacted. So there is plenty of time for amendments to be placed in it if they wanted to. I have asked the Greens and I have asked Labor: “Give me your amendments. What problems do you have with the bill?” Deathly silence, other than what we see as verbiage and garbage from Mr Stanhope in the media. But in terms of any amendments that they wish to bring forward because they have got genuine, legitimate criticisms of or corrections to my bill, or amendments, there has been absolutely nothing, because Labor is running a line of interference and the Greens have been too lazy and idle to do the research on this. That is what is quite clear.

It is not true to say that this is a new issue or that consultation has not occurred. With respect to consultation on this issue of RDT, Mr Hargreaves, over at the back, would know that the consultation and engagement with the community on random drug testing in the ACT has been prolonged, protracted and extensive. Indeed, the government, back in 2007-08, set out a process of engagement with the community. The University of Canberra hosted a drugs and driving forum.

Mr Hargreaves: On a point of order, Madam Assistant Speaker, I have a couple of points that I might seek your ruling on. Firstly, I think it is customary when people make statements that they are brief, and not re-litigate an argument. Secondly, Madam Assistant Speaker, I would ask you to be a bit vigilant and seek the Clerk’s assistance so that we are not allowing a reflection on a vote of this chamber, when the vote of this chamber was not to allow the debate to go on. What I am hearing, in fact, is further debate on that same question, which is a reflection on a debate which has already occurred in this chamber. So I would ask you to ask Mr Hanson to draw it to a close fairly quickly.


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