Page 79 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 28 February 2007

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


MR HARGREAVES (Brindabella—Minister for the Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Housing and Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (4.08): I welcome the opportunity to speak against the motion of no confidence in the Chief Minister. The Leader of the Opposition is asking for a vote of no confidence in the Chief Minister who, 18 months after fighting the bushfires, fought an election and won majority government from the electors of the ACT, the same Chief Minister who has set new benchmarks for a member of this place in personal bravery and for moral and political courage.

We remember, Mr Speaker, the Chief Minister’s role in the desperate rescue of a crashed helicopter pilot. We remember the leadership that earned widespread acclaim in the immediate aftermath of the fires. We remember also his moral and political courage in driving a law reform package that resulted in guaranteed rights for all and the removal of all legislative discrimination against same sex couples and the tort law reform push that required him to stand up to the Prime Minister and other first ministers, as well as stare down the AMA. His political courage was shown in the 2006 budget, which forced the electors to face up to the fact that the ACT had been living beyond its means under all the minority governments that had been in place since 1989.

This no-confidence motion has been moved as a matter of politics by a person whose own undistinguished career cannot be advanced except by pulling the Chief Minister down to his level. The Liberal leader and his party have no hope of reaching the level of leadership and unity set by Mr Stanhope. The only thing left for them is to criticise in an effort to tear him down. Of course, like all critics, they lack accurate information or feasible alternatives and refuse to acknowledge their own past misjudgments. For example, two members opposite were cabinet members in the Bruce Stadium affair. Mr Stefaniak no doubt thinks he can pander to the ACT public with this stunt. In doing that, he leaves himself exposed as someone who will indulge in futile, posturing rhetoric while avoiding the reality of hard, important issues such as unifying his party and presenting them as a credible alternative government.

Mr Speaker, we are united in our sorrow for what happened on 18 January 2003. I was devastated when I got the news—I was away from Canberra at the time—and was extremely sorry that four people lost their lives and so many others were injured. Many of those injured will carry the physical scars forever. But those not directly involved, and the coroner, have spoken. They want the territory to move on. That was the message of the 2004 election, now more than two years behind us, when the government increased its vote in the areas most directly affected. The coroner’s report contains recommendations that will allow us to put this matter behind us once and for all.

My analysis of the coroner’s recommendations is that there are a number of key themes: administration of the coronial process and courts, which is unrelated to the fires and is a matter for future consideration by the Attorney-General; administration of emergency services, where great changes have been put in place since 2003 by a succession of ministers, including me; strategic bushfire prevention; and operational and tactical bushfire response.


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