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

Extension of time granted . . Page.. 861 ..

Before self-government that was never available to the Territory. In the last Assembly the corporatisation of ACTEW was not attempted because the numbers were not here. We are being driven now by a mangy bit of ideology by just a few Liberals who think, because there are more of them than any other group - they do not have a majority - that they are able to inflict this on the Territory. Well, Labor, for one, and our colleagues the Greens, who initiated this debate, will not go down that path. (Extension of time granted)

Labor will be supporting the motion for it to go to a committee because it makes sense. A lot of rhetoric has come from people like Mr De Domenico - hollow, shallow, rhetoric; nothing of substance, nothing that would convince anybody in the community, not one person - - -

Ms Follett: “We do not know. We believe; we do not know”.

MR BERRY: Yes. That was pretty understandable. I would have to say that in the couple of weeks since this Bill was introduced there has been little advance on “We do not know”, as far as I can make out.

Mr De Domenico: You should have turned up to the briefings.

MR BERRY: I heard you speak a little while ago, making out a case why this should not happen. You did your very best to make out a case why this should not happen. There was no information in that; there was just more old rhetoric, just more of the old-fashioned rhetoric. You dredged it up again. Mr Speaker, we have the opportunity here to demonstrate to all of our constituents that we are not fearful of a full inquiry into ACTEW. I will say to you, Mr De Domenico, that we are not convinced - - -

MR SPEAKER: Through me.

MR BERRY: Through Mr Speaker. Our position is that there is no case for the corporatisation of ACTEW; but we would be more than happy to see the entrails of the organisation closely examined in a committee process, and, most importantly, in a public way so that members of the community with an interest in these sorts of issues can get themselves to the inquiry process and lead us to some recommendations in relation to the future of that outfit.

I plead with some of our crossbench people who in the past have endorsed a committee process. Do not take this step, because the case has not been made out. Let us examine the issue first. It is too important to muck about with. If you start mucking around with organisations like ACTEW - substantial and large organisations - you can do a lot of damage. I did hear that there was going to be a proposal that we have an inquiry after it is corporatised. That is nonsense. You cannot go down that path because the dirty deed will have been done and the case has not been made out. Why on earth would you want to have an inquiry after the deed has been done? It seems to me to be a nonsense.

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