Page 5675 - Week 15 - Thursday, 10 December 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The Canberra Liberal opposition have proposed two extra sitting weeks, as we did this time last year. The variation in the sitting pattern over the years has been somewhere around 14 to 16 weeks, but there have been times when we have had more rather than fewer sittings. We are concerned about the amount of work that is done in this Assembly. Part of the problem is that the people who pay us, the people of Canberra, think that we only work when we are sitting. They find it quite amazing when we say that we only sit for 14 weeks a year. They think that for the rest of time we do not work. Some people do actually spend a large amount of their non-sitting time doing constituency work and there is often the feeling that sittings get in the way of the actual business of being a member of the Legislative Assembly.
First and foremost, our job is to legislate. Our job is to be in this place or working on committees. That is what we are paid to do. We are constantly cutting back on the amount of time available for debate in this place—and we have it seen it here today—because it is just too hard for the Labor Party to have debates in this place. The Canberra Liberals firmly believe that we should be having more sitting days. Last time we had the debate Ms Bresnan said, “Look, we’ve actually MacGuyvered you the same number of hours by extending the sittings.”
Ms Bresnan: But it’s true, Vicki.
MRS DUNNE: Yes, there were the same number of hours but there were not the same number of question times. Question time is part of the process. Every time you extend the sitting by a few hours you become less accountable because by doing that you cut back the number of question times.
Mr Coe: We finish short on Wednesdays anyway.
MRS DUNNE: We finish short most days. Everyone is desperate to go home on a regular basis around this place, or the Labor Party and the crossbenches seem to be desperate to go home. It is time that Assembly started to do some work and it is time this government became accountable.
Part of the process of extending the number of sitting days is extending the number of question times. That is part of the process of ensuring accountability from this place—accountability for why there was a cost blow-out for the dam; why Mr Corbell can never deliver any public works project on time or on budget; why people are still in hospital after 2½ years when they need to be in disability housing. There is a whole range of things that we are questioning people on here on a regular basis. These are important matters. That is why we need more sitting days and more question times. I commend the amendments to members.
MS BRESNAN (Brindabella) (12.19): I think we know who is on the red cordial today; it is not Mr Stanhope. The key issue for next year’s sitting pattern seems to be whether or not we should extend the amount of time we spend in this place. I appreciate Mr Corbell having approached the parties in a timely manner and seeking our response to his proposed sitting pattern. Three ideas that we have raised in response that I wish to discuss are: adding two sitting weeks, having flow-over debates on Fridays and extending lunch hours.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video