Page 761 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 9 March 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
concerned about what is going on. If this government’s only approach to this is to puff themselves up and say, “We are doing the best and no-one else can do better”, then it is a very sorry state of affairs for the ACT.
This motion and this amendment are about the hubris of the government. It is a bit like what Mr Smyth was talking about last night in the adjournment debate—the command performance approach. This is about lording it over the people of the ACT who have particular concerns. This is not governing for the people; this is that Jon Stanhope, Minister for the Environment, is going to have his way at all costs.
If Jon Stanhope does not want to stop forestry operations in the catchment he should have the courage of his convictions, have the courage to stand up here and say, “I do not want it stopped, and I will vote that way.” If he is too afraid to table the documents and show the discussion, let him have the courage of his convictions and say that; let him not turn this around into some jolly backslapping exercise, which is always the case here. This Chief Minister, this Minister for the Environment, does not have the courage to stand up here and say, “I will not consult. I will not take the people of the ACT into my confidence.” He does not have the guts to do it and, because of that, we should not support this amendment.
This amendment is to do everything it possibly can to wipe away the record that someone raised here because they are too afraid to face the people of Canberra. This is what happened here yesterday, when the Minister for Health had the audacity to stand up in this place and say that the things that were said in the Canberra Times were needlessly alarmist. There may be some things that were said in the Canberra Times that did alarm people but it is not proper for the Minister for Health to come in here and say, “You should not be alarmed; do not panic; trust me. Trust Simon Corbell; everything is all right”—and rely on testing that happened in May and December last year.
Mr Corbell: Are you questioning the Chief Health Officer? Is that what you are doing?
MRS DUNNE: I am questioning the Minister for Health, who had the audacity to take advice, come in here and, on the strength of advice, which you may weigh in the balance, say, “There is nothing to be concerned about.” They relied on evidence that was taken in May and December last year; they are not relying on evidence of what is happening now.
Mr Corbell: You’re such an expert, aren’t you? You’re a real expert.
MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Corbell.
MRS DUNNE: We also know that, as a result of concerns raised somewhere—and I am not saying they are concerns I have raised—the health department and Actew have decided that they are going to test the water that comes out of the treatment works. So there is a nagging doubt somewhere that there may be something wrong. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with the water supply. What I am saying is that we need to have the facts on the table and no-one, including the Minister for Health, has all the facts.
No Minister for Health should come in here and unequivocally say, “It is all right. There is nothing to be concerned about”—because we do not know for sure. When you do not know for sure, the general rule is that you apply the precautionary principle. When we
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .