Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2008 Week 02 Hansard (Thursday, 6 March 2008) . . Page.. 597 ..
These are the Public Accounts Committee, the Planning and Environment Committee and a legislative scrutiny committee.
It actually then suggests further in the submission under the heading of “Draft standing orders as they relate to committees—Appointment of general purpose standing committees” in paragraph 2:
The following standing committees shall be appointed:
(a) Planning and Environment;
(b) Public Accounts; and
(c) Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation.
I find it quite amazing that Mr Corbell would come in this place and take up so much time saying things that are not correct. These issues were discussed at the meeting. I went and checked with members of the staff who were there and I said, “I have recollections.” We checked the notes, and it is included in the notes. This is the submission that you clearly have not read, Mr Corbell, and you have dug yourself an enormous hole. The whole issue of whether or not standing committees should be listed so that it is quite clear in the standing orders that they exist or not was debated, and the committee came to the conclusion that they should not be. Does that mean I have to accept what the committee has decided? No, it does not. The process in this place for a long time has been that members issue dissenting reports.
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 SMYTH: Mr Corbell did come to that meeting, and my recollection is he left early, so he was not there for the entire debate. We have got a minister who takes second-hand advice from someone who does not remember what actually happened or is recorded in the minutes, and then accuses others of not being there when they were, because he left early. That is standard operating procedure for the minister. He comes in here and twists and turns and spreads falsehoods. He can go and check the minutes—I have got the minutes with me and I have got the submission with me. Mr Corbell has not read it and he does not remember it. Ms MacDonald has not read it and Ms MacDonald does not remember it. I am quite happy to table it if they want. It is in the notes. These issues were discussed. It is quite clear that they were discussed, and Mr Corbell is just wrong. If he had any moral fibre, he would apologise for his goings-on this morning.
The second issue is whether or not people can move amendments to anything that comes before this place. The standing order provides that amendments can be made. We have got this old minute-to-midnight speech—woe is us, a minute to midnight. I do not think you should be reflecting along the way—
Mr Corbell: Point of order, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker: in the same way that the issue of relevance was drawn to my attention around debate on this, I think it is