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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 8 Hansard (29 October) . . Page.. 2448 ..

MR KAINE: Thank you, members. In relation to paragraph (2) of Ms Tucker's motion, I move the following amendment, which will be amendment No. (4) of mine:

(4) Paragraph (2), omit the paragraph, substitute the following paragraph:

"(2) the Committee members to be Mr Osborne, Mr Rugendyke and Mr Kaine.".

I do this because of some comments that have been made during this debate. The Acting Chief Minister said that he did not think that a select committee would have any value because the government member would have one view and the opposition member would have another view and therefore we would get no resolution of the issue. I agree. That is a possibility. He also said that the only three people in this place who had not made up their minds about what the outcome should be were Mr Osborne, Mr Rugendyke and me.

Based on those two statements from the Government, it seems to me that a committee consisting of we three would remove the politics from it, allow us to look objectively at the issues and come back to this place with an unbiased, unpoliticised view that the Assembly could then consider. It seems to me to be an eminently sensible way to go. That being the case, it would be my intention, and I am sure the other two members would agree, that the report that we make should be sooner rather than later. While the target date established in Ms Tucker's motion would stand, we would certainly seek, I believe, to come back much more quickly than that if any information was made available to us so that we could come to some reasoned conclusions.

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, I think it is a sensible way to go. The crossbenchers now have an opportunity to really influence the outcomes on this issue, uncontaminated by the politics of the Government and the Opposition. I think it is a wonderful compromise. I seek the support of all members of this place.

MR QUINLAN (1.07): Let me speak in support of Mr Kaine's last amendment, very briefly. It seems to me that a committee as now proposed would be a much more effective method of informing those within this place who are yet to determine a position. They could call for information from people other than those of us who stand accused of having a fixed and immutable position on this question. They would have the opportunity to call for information from the impacted stakeholders and from external experts. The committee members can demand particular information and particular resolutions of issues that may be before them. It is a very sensible amendment to the motion. I commend Ms Tucker for standing aside, effectively, and allowing this particular composition of the committee. Really, I do not think there is anybody in the place who could object to it at this stage.

MR CORBELL (1.09): I will sit again if Mr Osborne or Mr Rugendyke want to comment on the proposal. This, I think, is a sensible proposition, whilst it is not, in my view, the ideal one because our standing orders provide for proportional representation on committees. In the light of these rather exceptional circumstances, I think there is an argument to be made, quite reasonably, that if the only objection to the establishment of

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