Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (29 April) . . Page.. 181 ..
MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):
My theory, Mr Speaker, is that, in fact, the document does not do anything of the sort. The document he is referring to is, in fact, a litany of reasons why the ACT branch of the Labor Party would never privatise anything. The statements Mr Stanhope and Mr Quinlan have made in this place today about why the door is ajar are, in fact, a myth. There is no door ajar. The fact is that the policy of the Labor Party is as Mr Berry stated it during the recent election campaign. They would never privatise - end of story, full stop, lock up the door and go home. That is what I suspect is the state of play; but I am prepared to be surprised, and surprised I would be. Mr Speaker, I think that it would be appropriate and courteous to this chamber if Mr Corbell, having trumpeted the benefits of this document, having told us how good this document is, were now to put the document on the table. I invite him to do what he has had done many times on this side of the chamber and be courteous enough to table the document that has been referred to.
Mr Corbell: Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table the document. Let us waste no more of the time of the Assembly.
MR BERRY (4.58): Mr Speaker, I am pleased that I am able now to speak to this motion. Mr Humphries could not possibly urge his large numbers of staff to go to the library and discover these things; he would rather pull a stunt on the floor of the chamber. I intend to amend this motion to require all parties and members in this place to table their criteria for the privatisation of public assets in order that we can determine whether they have any at all. That will be an interesting voyage of discovery, I am sure.
Mr Speaker, I am in the process, I think, of putting together an amendment which will require all parties and members respectively to provide that sort of documentation. It strikes me that, whilst there is an enthusiasm amongst the coalition to attack the Labor Party over this issue, their own laundry needs to be aired in this respect. It will be interesting to see whether the Liberal Party has any public criteria at all. The Labor Party's criteria are public. It will be interesting to see whether Mr Osborne has any criteria at all. It will be interesting to see whether the other Independent, Mr Rugendyke, has any criteria at all. It will be interesting to see whether the new member of the Government, Mr Moore, has any criteria at all. Mr Speaker, these facts will be fully revealed if members opposite, in their saintly pose, are prepared to support such an amendment. It will be very interesting to see whether those opposite who are so fulsome in their commitment to this recently discovered principle of access to Labor Party documents will be prepared to adopt the same principle in respect of themselves.
Mr Humphries: We will table our policy statements.
Mr Hird: No trouble at all. What have we got to hide?
MR BERRY: I suspect that many of you have nothing. It is not a case of whether you have anything to hide; it is a case of whether you have anything at all. It is the old, "We will show you ours. Okay; you have got ours, now show us yours". This is a very obvious opportunity to demonstrate your saintly position. I hope that the Greens have clear criteria in relation to this issue, and others as well.