Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 9 Hansard (19 November) . . Page.. 2688 ..
Mr Berry: Order her to wind up, Mr Speaker. This is ridiculous.
MR SPEAKER: Develop the point. There is no point of order.
MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, they have just taken 10 minutes in points of order.
MR SPEAKER: I know. We are getting to a situation which is fast becoming absurd.
MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, I will move to Mr Quinlan - right back to the issue here - who issued a media release on 26 October claiming that the people of Canberra benefited from a stream of income tax equivalents from ACTEW. Last time I checked - Mr Quinlan, you are wrong again - income tax equivalents were not paid to the ACT Government and would not be paid under the accelerated depreciation schedule agreed with the corporation. So the $20m a year that Mr Quinlan claims we receive from ACTEW simply does not exist. That leads me to Mr Stanhope - - -
Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Opposition have taken points of order about how long this is taking, but they have spoken almost continuously while Ms Carnell has been speaking. There has been continuous talk, interjections, backchat, points of order and so on over the last 10 minutes. I think we deserve to hear Ms Carnell's answer with some clarity.
MR SPEAKER: I uphold the point of order. We will get through this a lot faster without the interjections.
MS CARNELL: Absolutely, Mr Speaker. That leads me to Mr Stanhope, the leader of the new Labor Party. But on the Internet site Mr Berry is still leader. So much for a clever capital, Mr Speaker, or a clever Labor Party. In Mr Stanhope's drive for that open and honest debate, on 14 October Mr Stanhope told ABC radio that the level of unfunded superannuation liability in New South Wales was actually the same as the level of unfunded superannuation liability in the ACT. How does this statement stand up against a recent report by the Productivity Commission which found that the New South Wales Government's superannuation liabilities averaged about 10 per cent of salary costs, while the ACT's liabilities were 21 per cent? That is more than double, Mr Speaker. We could go on and on about this because those opposite continue to mislead the people of Canberra in a situation where they want an open and honest debate. We would like an open and honest debate, but those opposite - - -
Mr Corbell: What about the UMS study? What about the latest IPARC submission? You are not willing to release any of those documents because you know they reveal that your argument is wrong.
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Corbell, the length of the Chief Minister's response has certainly been assisted by the interjections. If you want the Chief Minister to wind up, stop interjecting, which is out of order anyway.