Page 307 - Week 01 - Thursday, 14 February 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR SESELJA: Mr Pratt has asked.
Mr Hargreaves: I will debate you any time you like.
MR SESELJA: Perhaps briefings are only given to—
MR TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, Mr Hargreaves!
MR SESELJA: members who the minister believes will accept whatever is given to them, as seems to be the case in the debate we have heard so far.
Mr Pratt, it must be said, has been proven right on this issue. He has been proven absolutely right and the minister has been proven wrong. And that is why Jon Stanhope had to come in over the top while Mr Hargreaves was on holidays and make the decision. It was a decision that the minister refused to make. It was a decision that could have been made much, much earlier. It was a decision that the Tharwa community was told was not an option. They were told that this bridge was going to fall into the river and there was no prospect of restoring it. They would have backed any alternative offered to them because they did not want to have the kind of delay that we have seen in the last few months.
Mr Hargreaves: You were there, were you?
MR SESELJA: Well, this is what the Tharwa community has told us and I do not believe they are liars. I do not believe they are telling us untruths. They have told us—they have made it very clear publicly—that they were told that this bridge was going to fall into the river and that there was no prospect of it being restored. I find it extraordinary that Mr Pratt has been refused a briefing on this issue. The minister makes great play about how much information has been given—
It being 45 minutes after the commencement of Assembly business, the debate was interrupted in accordance with standing order 77. Ordered that the time allotted to Assembly business be extended by 30 minutes.
MR SESELJA: We have been told by the Tharwa community that they were given no choice. They were told that they had no other option, that the bridge could not be restored and that their only option was to get another bridge, a concrete bridge. In fact, I have some recollection of the minister himself coming into this place and telling us that the timber would not be able to be sourced and giving us all sorts of reasons as to why this could not be done. It seems now that the Chief Minister disagrees. It seems that the decision that has been taken by the government is that actually this bridge can be restored, that actually this bridge will be restored and brought back to life. In the end that is a reasonable result for the community, except that they have waited 500-and-how-many days, Mr Pratt—
Mr Pratt: 512.
MR SESELJA: 512 days with this bridge closed. If this government had done its work and managed this process well in the first place the bridge would be open to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .