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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (29 April) . . Page.. 149 ..

Mr Berry: May I interject with a point of order? All I asked was whether or not the Chief Minister thought it was honourable. She does not care to comment on the matter. I wonder whether you would ask her to.

MR SPEAKER: You asked originally whether the Chief Minister unequivocally would not sell.

Mr Berry: No. My supplementary question was whether or not she thought it was honourable.

MR SPEAKER: I am aware of your supplementary question. The Chief Minister is now legitimately, in my opinion, referring to earlier comments that were part of her answer to your original question. Proceed, Chief Minister.

MS CARNELL: What I am saying is that we were quite clear in our position on Territory-owned corporations in the run-up to the election; we were absolutely clear.

Mr Berry: I take a point of order. The original question is not the one that is afoot here. The question is the supplementary question. All I want to know is whether the Chief Minister thinks it is honourable. Yes or no?

MR SPEAKER: I suppose the Chief Minister is about to demonstrate how people cannot necessarily act in an honourable fashion, having made certain promises.

MS CARNELL: If they did not say what he said we said. The point is that anybody who made a categorical promise would be doing what Michael Egan did at the New South Wales ALP conference in October 1995, when he said:

Right from the start, right from the start, right from the start I made it absolutely clear that privatisation was not on our agenda. I made that clear. Bob Carr made that clear. Not once, not twice, but time and time again.

If I had said that and then decided to sell our electricity assets, as Bob Carr and Michael Egan have, that might not have been terribly honourable; but the fact is that we did not say that. What we have said is that we will manage the Territory's assets in the best interests of the people of Canberra. We will ensure that the right business decisions are made to maintain our assets, to maintain competitive prices and to maintain quality service delivery. I table the document.

Special Magistrate

MR RUGENDYKE: My question is to the Attorney-General, Mr Humphries. Earlier this year I noted that Special Magistrate Garry Dellar had appeared before the court for his third drink-driving offence. I also noted that Mr Dellar is still operating in the ACT as a special magistrate. Does Mr Dellar's continued employment as a magistrate reflect the attitude of either you or the Government over this most serious community offence?

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