Page 2964 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Ms Hunter: We did. It was painful.
MR SESELJA: Ms Hunter interjects again. She was not actually able to deal with the motion. She engaged again in sweeping, broad generalisations. Mr Smyth highlighted it. He highlighted all the bits of our motion that they apparently disagree with—that the government is claiming to have failed to have collected the change of use charge. That is what they said. They apparently disagree that a massive increase in the charge amounts to a massive tax or that urban infill is an important measure to address transport and climate change issues. These are the bits they disagree with.
They disagree that a waiver of the charge is being used to provide an incentive and that the government is seeking to codify the charge or that considerable uncertainty is being caused and that this uncertainty is causing a rush for valuation. Ms Hunter could not oppose any of that. The only bit she tried to address was to say that the industry is comfortable with this process.
That was Ms Hunter’s contribution to this debate, apart from agreeing with the Treasurer and getting plaudits from the planning minister and the Treasurer on this. You always know you are holding the government to account when they are just lining up to applaud. They are lining up to applaud. You always know that they are feeling the pressure when they line up to applaud what you have got to say, Mr Speaker. We see it time and time again with Ms Hunter.
I would have to say that she would be the government’s favourite Green. I do not think there would be any doubt about that. There might be some competition there, but I would think that Ms Hunter would stand out as the favourite Green of the government. We see it; we see the smiles on the faces. We hear the plaudits saying, “Yes, keep scrutinising us in the way you are, Ms Hunter; keep doing it in the same way that you have been because—
Mr Hanson: That rigorous scrutiny.
MR SESELJA: it is working very well for us. It is working very, very well for us.” Ms Hunter’s contribution completely ignored the facts.
Members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, members!
MR SESELJA: She is continuing with this obsession about—
Members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order!
MR SESELJA: Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Hanson: You are not interested in this, are you?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video