Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (5 May) . . Page.. 1387 ..
MR OSBORNE (continuing):
concerns in this matter are more focused on the taxpayers' dollars than on whether the Raiders' or the Brumbies' contracts are tabled in the Assembly. I do apologise to Mr Neil and Mr Sinderberry, but I have to say that I do think that they need to be on the table.
In summary, Mr Speaker, I just need to stress that I think Bruce Stadium is a tremendous facility. I think that what we have here in Canberra will be acknowledged in years to come as one of the great arenas in this part of the country. In saying that, I do think that there is enough concern over what has happened, about the information that has been provided, for this Assembly at least to scrutinise many of the contracts that have been involved in this process. I reiterate and stress that I believe that it is a tremendous facility. I still believe, though, that this Government or possibly a Labor government will be coming before the Assembly in the not too distant future and, throwing their hands up, saying, "We will be paying for all of this". I am not saying that that is a bad thing, Mr Speaker, but I do think that there needs to be at least some acknowledgment from the Government that that is a possible scenario. I will be supporting the motion by Mr Stanhope, with the date being the one issue that I have yet to make up my mind on, Mr Speaker.
Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, I have not yet moved the amendments which have been circulated in my name, so I seek leave to move them now. There are two on one sheet, numbered 1 and 2, and a third one on another sheet. We might call that No. 3 for the sake of efficiency of labelling. Mr Speaker, the first amendment removes reference to the three paragraphs which, I would argue to the Assembly, would cause the Government considerable difficulty if it is required to table those documents.
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Humphries, I am told that you cannot move your amendments at the moment. We can have only one amendment at a time and Mr Kaine has one before the house.
Mr Humphries: I was seeking leave to move my amendments, Mr Speaker. According to standing orders, I have sought leave to move the amendments. If I cannot seek leave to do it, I will take your word for it.
MR SPEAKER: We have a procedure drawn up for the moving of the amendments, but it just a matter of finishing off the debate. Does anybody else wish to speak?
MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education) (4.14): Mr Speaker, I have listened intently to the debate this afternoon. Certainly, I would agree with a lot of what Mr Osborne has said. Bruce Stadium is certainly, whichever way things pan out in this debate, an international-quality sports stadium. It is world class and has excellent facilities for sports persons, for spectators and for workers. It is going to stand us in good stead for probably another 40 or 50 years as a premier stadium. It is interesting to look at the history which Mr Osborne has gone through. I am not necessarily saying that it might all be right. But I wonder whether, at the end of it all, that is supportive of the need to table all these documents, as Mr Stanhope would want.