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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 4889 ..

MS McRAE (9.45): In speaking further to the amendment, I would like to put on record that the views of the Labor Party were made quite clear when the response to Stein was first put down. If Mr Osborne wants to impugn my motives, he should state it in the form of a motion and put outright what his suspicions are. If they refer to me, let him say exactly whom he is talking about and exactly what sort of deal he thinks I am involved in. I do not take lightly these accusations. We made our responses to this legislation quite clear when Mr Humphries made his statement about the response to Stein, when it went to the committee, when it came back from the committee and when we debated it here in the Assembly. There is nothing new in this legislation that takes us away from the matters that Mr Humphries raised at that time.

Mr Moore: Yes, there are.

MS McRAE: The stuff that is new comes from Mr Moore. I have already dressed Mr Moore down for presenting a new idea like this without the benefit of the six months of substantive debate. Mr Moore likes to find a series of details that are different from the words that Mr Humphries used in the response to Stein. My statement is that in principle the key issues that were raised in the response to Stein, the Mant/Collins review and the Red Tape Task Force were put on the table quite early in the year. I responded to them then. Members can read the detail of my response at that time in Hansard.

I am tired of Mr Osborne's accusations. Later, perhaps tonight or in another sitting, I will refer to similar accusations of collusion that Mr Moore has made in the Chronicle. I am sick to death of them. If people want to make those accusations, they should put them on the table, move a motion against me and debate the motion. Otherwise, they should stay out of it. You have absolutely no basis for the sorts of accusations that I have been subjected to all the way through the debate.

We have responded to this legislation, to the responses to Stein and to all the amendments that have been put before us in the way that we have made quite clear from the beginning, because they are logical responses to eight years of changes in the planning areas, to the inquiries that have come through and to all the reviews that have come through. I am putting it on the table. If anybody wants to impugn my motives, do it right now by way of motion and I will debate it.

MR OSBORNE (9.47): I certainly do not think Ms McRae has done a deal. I know who has done the deal. Ms McRae might help me word a motion on my gut reaction. I do not quite know how to word it. Because of my gut reaction I think the two major parties have got together. I do not quite know how to word a motion around that.

Mr Moore: I think we could get it right.

MR OSBORNE: Can we? I never implied that you had done a deal, Ms McRae. I never mentioned your name. I know who has done the deal. I know who the intermediary was. That is what I said. I did not once mention your name, Ms McRae. Perhaps I struck a raw nerve there - I do not know. If you would like to help my office word a motion about my instinct, please go ahead and do it.

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