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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 2 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 436 ..

Ms Tucker: I understand that, but I have a procedural question. I understand that this is probably not the appropriate place to ask, but I am going to try. If Mr Corbell's amendment is supported, can I then amend it?

MR SPEAKER: If the Assembly resolves to support the amendment, you can move a further amendment to add words to the motion if that is your wish, but Mr Corbell's amendment will stand on its own if it is supported by the Assembly.

Ms Tucker: But I can amend it, and if my amendment was supported by the majority the amendment would be altered?

MR SPEAKER: I think you misunderstood me. Mr Corbell's amendment, if supported, stands on its own. If you wish to put another amendment before the Assembly, it can only add words to Mr Corbell's already approved amendment.

The Assembly voted-

Ayes 7

Noes 8

Mr Berry

Ms MacDonald

Mr Cornwell

Mr Humphries

Mr Corbell

Mr Quinlan

Mrs Cross

Mr Pratt

Ms Gallagher

Mr Stanhope

Ms Dundas

Mr Stefaniak

Mr Hargreaves

Mrs Dunne

Ms Tucker

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

MS TUCKER (5.33): I am supporting Mrs Cross' motion, because, as I see it, it asks Mr Corbell, as minister, to allow the full Assembly and the community to have some input into the terms of reference of the feasibility study into light rail. I am surprised that Mr Corbell is reluctant to do that.

I understand that this Assembly cannot force the government to do that, and I am not suggesting that the Assembly should attempt to force the government. It is the government's job to take on this sort of work. However, this is a government that has told us that they are interested in consulting with the community and the broader parliament. I am surprised that there is a reluctance on Mr Corbell's part to involve us and the community in determining the terms of reference.

Mr Corbell explained that it is normal process for government to put these sorts of feasibility studies out to a consultant and for the consultant to work with the community. I accept and agree with that. But that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about the work that the consultant will do. This is such an important issue for the ACT community. Members in this place know how long the Greens have been asking for an integrated transport planning approach. Light rail or whatever we end up with is critical to moving into this period of life on earth in a way that is suitable and appropriate. It is incredibly important for this city. For that reason, I think the terms of reference are very important. We are going to do this work. It is going to cost public money. We are going to involve the community, so the work is important.

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