Page 5091 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 17 November 2009

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

required to report to us regularly, that the total volume of timber sold by wood merchants has reduced significantly over the past five years. So we know the total volume of wood being sold has also gone down. We can draw from that a conclusion that the use of wood heaters in the community is declining, both as a result of the buyback program and through other actions that households are taking, which is leading to less wood being sold by licensed wood merchants.

MR SPEAKER: Ms Hunter, a supplementary question?

MS HUNTER: Minister, is the reason why the don’t burn tonight campaign has not been promoted recently this lack of accurate air quality data in the last few years?

MR CORBELL: The air quality data does not drive the decisions about don’t burn tonight because the air-quality data is a retrospective assessment of air quality, whereas the don’t burn tonight campaign requires work on the advice of the Bureau of Meteorology about whether or not there will be conditions conducive to an inversion layer, particularly in the Tuggeranong Valley, which is obviously the problem when it comes to wood smoke. So the two issues are not related.

Hospitals—Clare Holland House

MR HANSON: My question is to the Minister for Health. Minister, at a public forum convened by the ACT Palliative Care Society on Thursday, 12 November, the Chief Minister indicated that selling Clare Holland House was not something that the government desired but that it was necessary in order to secure the Little Company of Mary Health Care agreement to sell Calvary hospital.

Mr Stanhope: On a point of order, Mr Speaker—

MR SPEAKER: Mr Stanhope, he has not finished his question.

Mr Stanhope: No, he has actually just verballed me. He just claimed that I said something that I did not say. I did not say that it was not something that the ACT desired. I responded to a question on whether or not it was fundamental to the ACT government’s position, and I replied that it was not, but I did not say it was not something that we desired.

MR HANSON: Mr Speaker—

MR SPEAKER: One moment, Mr Hanson. Just resume your seat, thank you.

MR HANSON: If I could just repeat what I said—

MR SPEAKER: No, Mr Hanson. Resume your seat, thank you. Mr Stanhope, there is no point of order. At this stage I do not believe that Mr Hanson has breached the standing orders. If you wish to make a personal explanation under standing order 46, you can do so subsequently.

Mr Stanhope: Or I could move to censure him for misleading, I presume.

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