Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (6 May) . . Page.. 1476 ..
MR STANHOPE (continuing):
sustain the new level of Commonwealth funding. Third, it relies on a renewed attack on its own, in the form of 450 more redundancies, a direct hit on another 450 Canberra families - and who knows what is in store in the outyears?
Mr Speaker, this budget does precious little to meet the aspirations of Canberrans. Its much vaunted transparency exposes the Government for its failings in leading the community in the critical debates we must engage in if we are to make sensible and sustainable decisions about our future. There is no leadership, and what little vision it contains is not a vision shared by Labor. In its own way, Mr Speaker, it is a very revealing budget. Perhaps it is a budget most aptly described as going the full monty.
Debate (on motion by Ms Tucker ) adjourned.
MR SMYTH (Minister for Urban Services) (3.27): Mr Speaker, no wonder the Opposition launched a no-confidence motion today. Mr Stanhope had another 10 minutes and I was waiting to hear what they were going to do. Clearly, Mr Stanhope stands for nothing, and that is what this motion today says, Mr Speaker. Mr Stanhope stands for nothing. He preaches civil liberties yet abandons them when the political expedient of a motion of no confidence is needed to hide the fact that he has no grasp of the reality of the budget.
Mr Stanhope has said nothing in this debate that convinces me that the motion of no confidence should proceed. Mr Berry actually said, "But wait, we've got more evidence", and we are still waiting for it.
Mr Berry: You will never be Deputy Chief Minister. Sit down. You will not make it.
Mr Stanhope: No, Michael is ahead of you. Michael will get there before you.
MR SMYTH: What did Mr Berry do? He just recounted stories.
MR SPEAKER: Order! This debate may have been adjourned, but the seriousness of the matter continues, and I do not want interjections.
MR SMYTH: Mr Berry says, "Wait for the evidence and we will tell you what it is", but we are still waiting, Mr Speaker. What we see here is nothing of substance. Mr Humphries stood and explained what happened. Let me reiterate. Mr Humphries stood and said, "Did a member of my staff visit the Bender family after the implosion? Yes, she did. Did she do so at my instigation? No, she did not. In fact, she did it at the instigation of her own community". This is a woman who is regarded highly in her community and was asked to continue that good work. Did she encourage the Benders not to engage Mr Collaery? No, she did not.