Page 2448 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 17 June 2009

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

consultation. Indeed, you could probably go back to almost all of our press releases leading up to there and you would read about it. That is what we are asking for, and I do believe that extensive consultation in this regard is needed for so many reasons that I have outlined. It goes to more than a simple survey. I believe that a survey really does not go to the heart of consultation. Consultation and a survey are not the same thing.

I then ask that the results of the business case, the analysis, the consultation and the presentation of what alternative options are on the table be provided to the Assembly. This is the house of debate in the ACT. This is where we should be provided with that information. If Labor are going to live up to the rhetoric that they put forward when they were in opposition leading into government, that is what they need to do. If they are going to live up to that rhetoric, to their good intent, that is the way that they should approach this issue, so that we can have a full and inclusive debate. If the evidence is there, I am sure the opposition will give this plan its wholehearted support. But at this stage, how can we do that? It would be impossible.

We also ask that an appropriation bill be put forward on this. I want to confirm that that is the case. There has been some speculation that this might be done through other arrangements. Because of the scale of this investment and because of the implications for the long-term investment in that site, I think it would be appropriate for that to be put forward as an appropriation bill so that it can be debated in this place.

In conclusion, it does appear, based on what I have said, that the Liberal Party is the only party now that is living up to the promises that so many make when they put out press releases. We are now the only party that wants consultation on such a substantial issue, and I find that incredible. We are the only party that wants to see and wants the community to see the business case, the facts and the details around this issue. I find that incomprehensible.

I will quote from Jon Stanhope when he was the Leader of the Opposition on the eve of the 2001 election. What he said Labor was going to do was implement “well thought-out programs drawn from policies developed in broad consultation with the community”. My view is that by not supporting this motion today the government has abjectly failed in the promises and statements it has made, and it is very difficult for me to draw any other conclusion.

Question put:

That Mr Hanson’s motion, as amended, be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 9

Noes 6

Mr Barr

Mr Hargreaves

Mr Coe

Mr Smyth

Ms Bresnan

Ms Le Couteur

Mr Doszpot

Ms Burch

Ms Porter

Mrs Dunne

Mr Corbell

Mr Stanhope

Mr Hanson

Ms Gallagher

Mr Seselja

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