Page 1858 - Week 06 - Thursday, 5 May 2005

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

That is really what it is about—how far do they travel? That is what I indicated to Mrs Dunne but, of course, she was not happy with that; she pressed the point through a question on notice. At the end of the day, if Mrs Dunne was really insistent about it, we were happy to answer the question.

What I find quite despicable about the Liberal Party’s approach is the snide little innuendo about the people who preach sustainable transport being the same people who are taking advantage of home garaging and free car parking. Those are the lines we have heard from the Liberal Party, from both Mr Seselja and Mrs Dunne.

If we are going to enter into this sort of snide little debate about practising what you preach, then maybe Mr Seselja should look at the fuel consumption of the vehicle he currently has from the Legislative Assembly, for example. I do not like entering these sorts of debates, but if that is the kind of debate we are going to have, I ask: what sort of fuel consumption does your vehicle undertake, Mr Seselja? How many vehicles has Mrs Dunne been through in the Assembly since she has been here? Those are the sorts of issues that could just as legitimately be debated when the Liberal Party brings in these snide little pieces of innuendo that we now hear in this Assembly all the time, simply as a matter of course.

The government does not like entering into that sort of debate. We do not see it as particularly worth while or indeed as adding anything to the credibility of these very important issues. If that is the approach we are going to see from the Liberal Party, then perhaps they need to reflect just a little on where they stand on some of these matters as well.

MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella) (11.56), in reply: I need to respond to Mr Seselja’s comments on Minister Corbell’s failure to answer questions during the annual report hearings on 22 February 2005. I wish to advise the Assembly of the committee’s and the chair’s views on the outcome.

The committee’s view is that Minister Corbell expansively answered all questions to the best of his knowledge and ability at all times. In relation to the question being discussed in Mr Seselja’s annex relating to the garaging of ACT Planning and Land Authority vehicles, the committee notes that this question has been answered fully and in detail, both in the realms of the committee hearing process and in the Assembly with a question on notice from Mrs Dunne.

It is the chair’s view that Mr Seselja has sought to use this committee process to promote his political agenda. Mr Seselja has, on several occasions in the committee process, attempted to castigate the Minister for Planning in additional comments added to reports.

The committee has gone out of its way to allow Mr Seselja to make additional comments to a selection of reports that affect the Canberra community. The committee has delayed the tabling of reports on several occasions to allow the construction of comments by Mr Seselja for addition to these reports. These comments have been found to have been be used by Mr Seselja to develop a political statement and a personal attack on Minister Corbell. The committee has met extraordinarily to discuss Mr Seselja’s additional

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