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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (30 April) . . Page.. 259 ..

Mr Moore: I think we have dealt with the issue.

MR SPEAKER: However, Mr Moore, when Mr Berry moved this amendment, he sought leave of the Assembly to do so and leave was granted. I am advised by the Clerk that this would override standing order 136. There is confusion as to whether this related exclusively to the Report of the Review of Governance or perhaps the rest that you are claiming; but, in any event, leave was granted by the Assembly to move this motion. You may continue, Mr Berry.

MR BERRY: I am glad that that has been clarified. I am glad that we had your able assistance, Mr Speaker, and the assistance of your clerical staff. I must say that it had my head spinning for a minute.

Mr Osborne made some comments about my comments in respect of Professor Pettit. From the outset I have never made a secret of my position about the Pettit inquiry. It was an illegitimate child born out of a failed relationship at the National Capital Futures Conference. The National Capital Futures Conference was a political move by the Government to establish themselves as the agent for change in the Territory, trying to create the impression that something was wrong and they were fixing it. An overwhelming number of people were concerned about that, not the least Mr Moore and Ms Tucker, as I recall.

Mr Moore: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Standing order 55 relates to "all imputations of improper motives". I think that Mr Berry is talking about the motives of people being improper.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Berry, do not be provocative.

MR BERRY: It was not about improper motives. It was my view of the world at the time, Mr Speaker. If anybody feels offended by that - - -

Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, that proves my point of order.

MR BERRY: That was my view of the world at the time. If people feel offended by that, I withdraw any imputation that they might feel I have laid against them.

The fact of the matter is that those were my views upon which I formed the opinion. Nobody at the National Capital Futures Conference called for this inquiry. It resulted from a deal struck between the Chief Minister and the relevant Commonwealth Minister. It was a very political statement from the Chief Minister. Nobody at the conference called for this inquiry. It was a political stunt from the outset. I made that clear from an early point. Mr Moore, as I recall, was reported in the paper as having some reservations about the inquiry as well at one point. Later on Mr Moore became a convert to the process, and a committee of inquiry was established. Professor Pettit was secured to chair the committee in circumstances which would hardly establish the view that the committee was independent. The Labor Party at the time - - -

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