Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 13 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 3907 ..
MR STEFANIAK (continuing):
on four committees. I am not going to go over any of the other points that other members have spoken about in relation to this matter. Some of my earlier comments were very appropriate in this regard.
I note that Mr Hargreaves does say that two of the committees may have four members, but what if things do not work out? He states that he is leaving that to the crossbench members, but that may not occur and we may end up with a situation of having two committees of four members with two crossbenchers right through to the remainder of this Assembly and the other four having three, which is what everyone intended. One would hope that common sense will prevail, but it hasn't to date, despite the very good efforts of Ms Dundas, who has done a lot of running around to try to sort things out in a sensible way. I think it would be very unfortunate should this motion get up.
Having said that, Mr Speaker, I have a letter here to you, which I will hand up at the appropriate time, nominating our member of the Standing Committee on Community Services and Social Equity, that is, Gregory Cornwell. I will give that letter to the Deputy Clerk so that Mr Cornwell can go down on the record as our member of that committee. I reiterate that these committees should be three-person committees representing, as best they can, the make-up of the Assembly that is needed to meet the workload.
MS TUCKER (12.28): I will not be supporting this motion. I have put my arguments already in the previous debate on Ms Dundas' motion. I am glad that Mr Hargreaves moved an amendment which provides Ms Dundas with an opportunity to make some changes to her committee work, if she so chooses.
MR SMYTH (12.29): Mr Speaker, I wait with interest for Mrs Cross to close the debate. I think it is extraordinary that the member who moved the motion did not start the debate by putting the reasons for the motion and has now chosen, apparently, not to close the debate in the appropriate manner. Clearly, the case for this motion is so flimsy that it is indefensible.
MRS CROSS (12.29): I will be very brief, Mr Speaker. I did have discussions with my crossbench colleagues Ms Tucker and Ms Dundas. They commenced before Ms Dundas-
Opposition members interjecting-
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mrs Cross has the floor.
Ms MacDonald: You 're the ones who wanted to hear her talk, and now you don't want to listen.
MRS CROSS: Thank you, Ms MacDonald. I did have discussions-in fact, a few discussions-with my crossbench colleagues before Ms Dundas went to the USA some time ago. We left those discussions open for decision. I had not long been on the crossbench, being there thanks to the people on the opposition benches, and I had to make some decisions on what I felt were in the best interests of my office and my current role.