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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4328 ..

MR BERRY (3.41): We will be opposing the motion. The reasons for that should be pretty clear to most people. In the first place, if documents of a sensitive nature are to be tabled in this place by a member, I think it would be best if all of the members here knew what was going to be tabled, so that they had full knowledge of what they were giving leave for; but that was not - - -

Mr Humphries: That is why I did not move to have them published at the time. They were tabled, but I did not move to have them published.

MR BERRY: That being the case, the papers ought not to have been presented in this place without Mr Moore having consulted with other members. I know that it was late in the evening when this happened. I am a little critical of the Government, because I think it is the Government's job to police these issues in the Assembly to make sure that good - - -

Mr Humphries: How were we to know it was going to happen? We were not told about it.

MR BERRY: If you have not been told - - -

Ms McRae: You were not there, Mr Humphries, but I did interject at the time.

Mr Humphries: Even if I had been, I would not have been able to stop it.

MR BERRY: It is the Government's role to protect citizens who might be affected by these sorts of things. I regret not refusing to give leave. I think one deserves to know exactly what is going on when one gives leave for a member to table in this place bundles of papers which in many cases could have no effect but in others could have calamitous effects. That is an issue that concerns us. We feel that we ought to have been consulted in the first place, before leave was sought and given.

So far as what has been said since then is concerned, I listened carefully to what the Speaker had to say. The Speaker described the way that he has been deliberating on the issue, quite appropriately as far as I can make out. One point he made is worthy of close interest. That is the fact that he sought further legal advice in relation to the matter. Mr Humphries referred to that as well. The Labor Party would be reluctant to agree with this motion while some part of the process is still in train. For those reasons, Mr Speaker, we will be opposing the motion moved by Mr Moore.

MS TUCKER (3.44): Mr Speaker, I think debate on the motion should be adjourned until such time as the legal advice has been received. I move:

That the debate be adjourned.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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