Page 2524 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
change the act. We are not going to go to the Assembly, the people’s representatives, and say what we want and take it to the commonwealth. We are going to play it a bit both ways and ask them and not really be clear what we want.” You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say, “We do not need this commonwealth oversight but really we are not quite sure what we want to do going forward.” If the alternative from Mr Corbell is that we simply have very few checks and balances going forward, I think it is very dangerous for democracy.
There are some very concerning aspects to this amendment and in some of the comments that Mr Corbell has made. In relation to the negotiations, I am advised on this by Mrs Dunne—I did not hear Ms Hunter’s speech—and this can be corrected by Mrs Dunne when she speaks if that is necessary. My understanding as of last night was that the Greens had agreed with our approach of taking it through a committee here in the Assembly. In Ms Hunter’s speech—this is where Mrs Dunne can correct me if I am wrong—we then heard about this joint review. Is that correct?
Mrs Dunne: That is right.
MR SESELJA: At some point since last night, when we were told that the approach was going to be to have a committee here—we did not hear anything until there was a speech there. I do not think any of us picked it up. It was only when we made a call to the Greens office that we were belatedly told that they were no longer agreeing to the committee.
I am very concerned about how these negotiations have been conducted. There was a deal stitched up some time overnight, it would appear, and there was a bit of lip-service after that point. That is how it appears to me. If someone is able to correct that record, I will consider that, but those are the facts as I understand them.
That is a concern to me; that goes to the heart of our negotiations. We did believe that we had a deal. It appears that those deals are not worth much. We understood that the Greens were supporting our approach of taking it through a committee. We were prepared to concede some ground on certain issues in order for that approach to go forward. That has been undermined at some point between last night and, it would seem, this morning’s speech. That is of great concern to me.
I would just finish by repeating that the checks and balances issue is a concern. There is the fact that not all of the issues are being considered in these terms of reference, so we are cherry-picking certain issues. The fact that it is now going to be a Labor government here and a Labor government federally that are going to stitch up the deal is of great concern to me, and I believe that it should be of concern to all of us.
We also undermine our case when we as an Assembly cannot make a decision as to exactly what we want changed before we ask the commonwealth to review. We are asking them to review without telling them what we want changed, without concluding it. It is completely the wrong way to go. I am disappointed with how the negotiations have been handled; I believe it is a very dangerous way forward. I believe the Greens have signed up to potentially giving the Labor Party a blank cheque, both here and federally. That is the danger in what we are doing.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .