Page 5161 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 18 November 2009

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

runs to the Russell Defence services, then runs through the parliamentary triangle. Where is Mr Coe’s detailed and comprehensive—I think “comprehensive” was the word that Mr Seselja used—analysis on that part of the service?

I have got to confess that I have not sat down and done that bit of anal work on the timetable yet. Frankly, I would like to hear it from Mr Coe. He has come in here and told only part of the story. Mr Coe’s narrow focus on these things is why, increasingly, here in the community, Mr Coe is being referred to as the member for small things. Mr Coe only ever looks at part of the story. That is why people call him the member for small things. It is the same analysis, and the same reason people are making the comment, as when Mr Coe started getting stuck into green paint on cycle lanes and failed to take into account the big picture. He fails to look at the big picture. He is too busy focusing on just the little details where he can score a cheap point.

I invite the Liberal Party to look at the big picture rather than talking down this trial from the start and doing their best to ensure that it is a failure. Before the bus service even started—at least last Friday, as I recall it—Mr Coe was in the paper saying, “This is going to be a failure.” That gives people in Gungahlin real confidence!

Mr Hanson: At least he looked at it, Shane.

MR RATTENBURY: I have looked at the timetable as well. Have a look at the map. Why haven’t you done the analysis about the trips through to the defence forces? Why haven’t you done the analysis through the parliamentary triangle? Because you are interested in the small things, Mr Coe. Go figure it. Think about the fact that you do not know absolutely everything about everybody in Gungahlin. Give us some real debate rather than focusing on just the minutiae.

MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Coe, are you closing the debate?

MR COE (Ginninderra) (11.29): I am happy to close the debate if that is the will of the Assembly. We have had some pretty interesting contributions today. A lot of it seems to me to be the Greens trying to cling to relevance. The Greens are desperately trying to say why they are relevant in this Greens-Labor agreement.

It seems to me that some people in ACTION have put this scheme together with no effort whatsoever from the Greens. It has obviously got flaws in it. The minister comes out and says it is fantastic, and the Greens blindly say it is fantastic too. I do not think any of them had actually looked at the timetable before today. I saw the Speaker looking over the old 727 timetable when he was in the chair earlier. I think that was the first time anybody from the crossbench had printed the timetable—the first time.

If Mr Rattenbury had this killer case that he looked at with the timetable over there—if they had looked at it before—surely that killer case would have come out in the speech of the first speaker for the Greens. But no. I do not think any of them had actually printed the timetable until half an hour ago, when the Speaker thought he might go and print it off and see whether the people of Gungahlin are getting a raw deal or not.

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