Page 1354 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 25 March 2009

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

MR SPEAKER: Mr Stanhope, have your seat, thank you. Sorry, Mrs Dunne; can you make your point again?

MRS DUNNE: My point is that, at great length, Ms Burch, when she was sitting in the chair, ruled about the way this would be dealt with. Mr Stanhope is continuing, as when she was in the chair. He kept questioning her. He is now questioning her again. That is a reflection upon her ruling that this is the way this matter will be dealt with. We are dealing with Mr Coe’s amendment.

MR STANHOPE: To be of assistance, Mr Speaker, I will withdraw the word “alleged”.

MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Stanhope. I think we are in an awkward situation but we will just do our best from here.

MR STANHOPE: No, it is just nonsense, but I withdraw the word “alleged” and replace it with “that we have been told”—that Mr Coe moved. It is interesting to look at it, because essentially what it does is call on the government to conduct a community meeting, which the department has already said it is conducting. I am just bemused by motions which call on the government to conduct a community meeting when the government has announced that there will be a community meeting on 29 April. Let us just remember these things in the context of responses that members make.

To move an amendment to his own motion calling on the government to conduct a meeting which the department, through Roads ACT, has announced it is conducting is really just superfluous and really just arrant and very cheap and shallow politics. The government is being called on to conduct a meeting which it has announced that it is going to conduct—and it has given the date of the meeting; the meeting is on 29 April. It has all been arranged and it has all been announced. It wants the government to take into account engineering advice from Roads ACT, the organisation that will be undertaking the upgrade to fix the problems that the Liberal Party did not have the gumption, when in government, to recognise as problems and which we now, in government, are determined to fix.

We need to just put these amendments in some perspective. TAMS have consulted. They are quite happy to consult further. They have already announced a community meeting but we are now to be called on to conduct the meeting which we have announced we are conducting. And Roads ACT is to be asked to rely on its own expert engineering advice of itself. TAMS, when they do something, even when it is just correcting Liberal Party mistakes, will, of course—can I just give an assurance that Roads ACT, in conducting the meeting and designing the engineering requirements of an enhanced and safer car park, will take into account its own views.

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (5.42): Mr Speaker, I seek leave to make an explanation of certain words under standing order 47.

MR SPEAKER: Mrs Dunne, given that we have a slightly confusing situation, is that important at this point or can we proceed to try to sort out the situation we are in?

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