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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Thursday, 4 March 2004) . . Page.. 749 ..

planning and land authority. I am not aware of what material, if any, it proposes to make available tonight. I undertake to make inquiries and to provide that information to the Assembly today, if that is at all possible.

MS TUCKER: Did the minister take on notice the main part of my question, which relates to how the government is dealing with bushfire buffer zones and weed intrusion?

MR CORBELL: Yes.

MS TUCKER: The minister has given an undertaking to provide that information to the Assembly. I ask a supplementary question. On the question of weeds, is the minister aware of any work that this government is doing to discourage or prevent the sale of invasive weeds to Canberra residents?

MR CORBELL: The sale of invasive weeds does not fall within my area of responsibility as Minister for Planning. That issue would be managed either by my colleague Mr Wood as Minister for Urban Services or my colleague Mr Stanhope as the minister for the environment. I cannot answer the member’s question.

Child protection

MRS BURKE: My question is to the Minister for Education, Youth and Family Services. On 10 February 2004 the Minister apologised to the Assembly for inadvertently providing an incorrect statement. She stated:

On 11 December, before I was informed directly by the department of their failure to comply with the legislation, I also tabled the government’s response to the standing committee on community services and social equity.

Once this new information was brought to my attention, it was immediately apparent that the government’s response did not, and could not address all of the serious issues contained in the committee’s report and must be revised.

Yesterday the minister advised the Assembly that she received the fax from her department at 1.24 pm and delivered the government response at 3.59 pm. However, she failed to come clean in her response on the most important piece of information in her hands, namely, that the department had broken the law. Why did she not mention the fact that it had just been drawn to your attention that her department had broken the Children and Young People Act when she delivered her response?

MS GALLAGHER: I will check Hansard from yesterday, but I am fairly confident that I said it left the chief executive’s office at 1.10, arriving at the fax machine in my office at 1.24. I did not at any time say that it was brought to my attention at 1.24. 11 December was a sitting day. As you can understand, in every member’s office things are extremely iffy on sitting days—as they are on non-sitting days. As I have said in my ministerial statement, it was brought to my attention after I had tabled the government’s response. I stand by that statement. I did not see the brief until after I had tabled the government’s response. Once I saw the brief I immediately went and had a discussion with the Chief Minister. I did not get the fax at 1.24.

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