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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 10 Hansard (23 September) . . Page.. 3522 ..

MR SPEAKER: Order, members! My memory of censure motions is that they have resulted in wide-ranging debates. However, I think it is fair for the affected minister to be concerned that issues to which he will not be able to respond are being raised in the context of a debate about a site at the corner of Nettlefold Street and Coulter Drive. I would ask members to contain their discussion of the issue to the matter which is the subject of the censure motion in order that the minister is treated fairly with regard to his ability to contribute to the debate on that subject.

Mr Smyth: Mr Speaker, to the point of order: Mrs Dunne raised these issues and the minister responded to them and Ms Dundas is now responding to the minister. On behalf of the opposition, I will say that we are happy for the minister to speak again before I wrap up. This is a serious matter and he should have the right to answer questions that are raised, but he has already responded to some of these matters.

MR SPEAKER: I did not particularly note those. However, the question has been raised as a point of order for me to rule on, and I think that members have to be relevant now that the point has been raised. Please proceed, Ms Dundas.

MS DUNDAS: I have been trying to limit myself to the censure motion itself. To finish, I will again make the point that this Assembly called on the minister to do something and the minister said, "No."The minister did not even try to find a way to comply, did not even come back and say, "This is what is wrong. This is why I cannot do this. Here are the options."That is the most concerning thing. This question was put to the minister today: "Have you done anything?"The answer was, "No."That is acceptable: it has only been a month and it takes time to do things.

However, for the next question, "Will you do anything?", the answer is still "No", and that is where the concern lies. That is why I think it is adequate today to say that the Minister for Planning does deserve to be censured for not complying with a direction of the Assembly, for not working towards a resolution, and for not providing information to this Assembly about how a resolution might have been achieved. That is what I think is at the heart of what we are talking about today.

MRS CROSS (3.39): Mr Speaker, I think the purpose of this censure today is not just saving trees or obtaining compensation. This is about the minister thumbing his nose at this Assembly and the processes that this very minister, when in opposition, stressed were important parts of the parliamentary system.

Like it or not, this government is a minority government, just like the government before it. Accordingly, this government does not represent the majority of ACT voters. I think it is also necessary to remind this government that it is there because of the crossbench members. It is also clear that this technicality irks the government from time to time. That is just the way it is: just put up with it. That is life. Thumbing your nose at your nine Assembly colleagues, three of whom are on the crossbench, is not a very clever thing to do given that you are there because of the crossbench and you are a minister because of the crossbench.

Mr Speaker, nine of the 17 members passed a motion in this place in August. The last time I did the maths, and correct me if I am wrong, nine beats eight every time. This

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