Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 03 Hansard (Wednesday, 9 March 2005) . . Page.. 798 ..
MR SPEAKER: There are no time limits under this standing order, but it is by my leave. I require you to come to the point of personal explanation, which you said you would.
MRS DUNNE Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would, and I was just about to when Mr Corbell took the point of order. This is a quote from me:
It’s good that he’s—
noticed his Labor mates in NSW are not providing the water they’re obliged to under the Seat of Government Act—shame he hasn’t cottoned on to the other problems with the Googong catchment like agricultural chemicals—
MR SPEAKER: Where is the misrepresentation? Come on! This is just a restatement of the press release. What is the misrepresentation?
MRS DUNNE: Sorry. Mr Stanhope quoted one sentence out of this paragraph and I would like, Mr Speaker, with your leave, to quote the entire paragraph, to demonstrate where I have been misled.
MR SPEAKER: Right.
MRS DUNNE: The press release stated:
It’s good that he’s noticed that his Labor mates … are not providing the water they’re obliged to under the Seat of Government Act—shame he hasn’t cottoned on to the other problems with the Googong catchment like agricultural chemicals, septic tanks affecting ground water, etc. Yet all his focus has been on the Cotter catchment management.
The point, Mr Speaker, is that there is more than one catchment that this Chief Minister and this minister for water should be responsible for. I did not at any stage—
MR SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat.
MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Minister for Arts, Heritage and Indigenous Affairs): Mr Speaker, I table Mrs Dunne’s press release in which she actually supports the Shaping our territory report. I would like to table also extracts from yesterday’s Hansard in which Mr Mulcahy, in his question, made statements, referring to me, claiming significant tax increases or major cuts in services, when I said no such thing. I table that as well. It highlights the fact that Mr Mulcahy was wrong and does not have the grace to acknowledge it. I present the following papers: