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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (6 December) . . Page.. 3762 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Let me say in addition on this subject of considerable importance that we have here not just an issue about how Canberra is being attacked and not defended by the Labor members in this place, but also an issue about the way in which the public perceptions of Canberra have changed.

I was at a function this morning where a person who lives outside the ACT made the observation that in recent years he had seen less and less of the antagonism towards the national capital that has been very characteristic, unfortunately, of Australians and he was buoyed and heartened by that because he was a supporter of this city. I said to him that I thought that there were indications of a lessening of that problem, that people these days were distinguishing between the federal government and the city of Canberra and the people of the ACT, but that it was still there.

I said to him, "I would have to say to you that the evidence is that it is still there when the man who purports to be the next Prime Minister of Australia is prepared to launch an attack on the ACT receiving funding under the national road program, describing it as a National Party boondoggle and saying that it had the smell of pork." I said to him that I hoped that those things would die out, but I thought that they would die out only when Australians of all descriptions reacted badly to those sorts of attacks on our national capital. That will not happen if we all assist in attacking the concept and if people are not prepared to tolerate this kind of behaviour, particularly by national leaders, people who ought to know better. (Extension of time not granted.)

In that case, I move:

Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, this is just a silly filibuster of undergraduate politics that we do not need.

MR SPEAKER: The motion is not open to debate, Mr Berry.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

MR HUMPHRIES: I looked at the minutes of yesterday's proceedings. We took about six hours over the Gaming Machine Amendment Bill 2000. What was that if not a filibuster, Mr Speaker? And who was filibustering? Those people opposite. For goodness sake, we have had three - quarters of an hour on federal roads funding. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

Mr Speaker, I want people to see that the residents of the ACT are prepared to stand up for their rights and entitlements and to see their elected representatives do the same thing. Just last week, the Liberal government here was asked - in fact, even directed - to write to the federal government on the question of the Noel Butlin Archives. We were asked to take up the concerns on behalf of the ACT community about reducing the resourcing for the Noel Butlin Archives. We did so. We accepted that responsibility without complaint, even though potentially it puts us in conflict with members of the federal government, because we do not mind standing up for things that are important about the city of Canberra.

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