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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4482 ..

MR WHITECROSS (5.37): Mr Speaker, as Ms Tucker has made a statement, I seek leave to make a statement, too.

Mr Moore: Come on! You have had two goes already.

MR WHITECROSS: It is my motion; I am entitled to a right of reply.

MR SPEAKER: Is leave granted?

Mr Moore: If it is brief.

MR WHITECROSS: I will be brief, I promise.

Leave granted.

MR WHITECROSS: Mr Speaker, I will be brief. Ms Tucker felt moved to give a second speech, and I feel that it is only right that I have the opportunity to respond to those things, seeing as it is my motion. The gist of Ms Tucker's remarks is that she now acknowledges that we have repeatedly taken points of order raising concerns about the operation of question time. Her problem, apparently, is that she does not take the Labor Party seriously when we raise these points of order, because she works from the presumption that we never mean what we say. I am sorry if Ms Tucker has been under an illusion about that, but the fact is that members of the Labor Party have meant what they have said in their points of order. Now that Ms Tucker is clear on that matter, she should be able to find her way to support our motion, understanding now that the points of order we have taken consistently over the last three years have been taken in good faith, taken seriously, and taken with the intention of improving the process, because we, more than anybody else, want to see questions answered in question time, for example.

Mr Speaker, there is one other thing I should say in relation to reforming question time, since Ms Tucker seems to feel that the Labor Party have no interest in reforming question time. Mr Berry himself proposed, as a way through the apparent impasse in relation to question time, a change to the standing orders which would have limited the length of answers to questions. It was a proposal which would have avoided some of the problems which have been canvassed today in relation to the way question time operates, particularly if the Government took up the challenge of actually answering a question within the time allotted. The fact is that, in relation to that matter, we were not able to elicit the support of the crossbenchers to bring that on, including the support of the Greens. It is simply not the case that we have not raised these matters; we have. Mr Berry even has a motion on the notice paper which is designed to provide for a process of reform of question time. If Ms Tucker has made the mistake of not believing that we meant what we said, that is Ms Tucker's problem. Now that she has had it explained to her that we do mean what we say, she ought to vote for this motion.

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