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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (29 April) . . Page.. 180 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I am astonished that the Labor Party, after time and again rising in this place to tell this Government how it has to be more open and more prepared to table documents when and if required by the Opposition or by the chamber generally, should have the audacity to tell us that, if we want to see what the Labor Party's criteria for privatisation are, we have to go and buy them.

Mr Corbell: You can use the library. It is a public document.

MR HUMPHRIES: Would you mind if, in the interests of defraying costs, we had a charge for the things that we otherwise might have to table in this place as well? Does a mere 20 bucks sound reasonable? Do you want an answer to a question on notice for a mere $10? That would be a pretty good bargain. Is $15 for a private document that has come into the Government's hands a fair market rate? Should we table a schedule of the price list outside our offices? For goodness sake, Mr Speaker! In this Territory at this time we are having a debate about privatisation. We want to see on what basis we consider the future status of assets in this Territory and the Australian Labor Party has the audacity to tell this community that it will not put on the table the criteria for privatisation.

Mr Corbell: It is a public document.

MR HUMPHRIES: If we go and buy it.

Mr Berry: It is a public document in the library.

MR HUMPHRIES: Oh! It is in the library now, is it?


MR HUMPHRIES: So, I have to go off and find it in the library. If the copy in the library is out to somebody, what am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to wander up to Mr Corbell's office and sit in his waiting room?

Mr Corbell: Come down to my office and I will give you one.


MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, as a matter of principle, if a document is relevant to a debate in this place and a member has referred to it and if it is available and there is no particularly good public policy or other reason for not tabling it, why should the member not table it? Mr Corbell has not put on the table a good public policy reason why it should not be tabled. Therefore, I have to ask: What does he have to hide? What is it about these criteria that he does not want people to see them? Why should we not see why it is or on what basis it is that the ACT branch of the Labor Party would be prepared to privatise public assets?

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