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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 11 Hansard (Tuesday, 19 October 2010) . . Page.. 4547 ..

Tuesday, 19 October 2010

MR SPEAKER (Mr Rattenbury) took the chair at 10 am, made a formal recognition that the Assembly was meeting on the lands of the traditional custodians, and asked members to stand in silence and pray or reflect on their responsibilities to the people of the Australian Capital Territory.


The following petition was lodged for presentation, by Mr Rattenbury, from 1,628 residents:

Environment—greenhouse gas—petition No 111

To the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory

This petition of certain residents of the Australian Capital Territory draws to the attention of the Assembly that: the Interim Report of the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Environment and Water recommended that the ACT Assembly legislates a climate change target of a 40 per cent reduction in overall ACT emissions by 2020, using 1990 as a baseline year.

Your petitioners therefore request the Assembly to: legislate a Greenhouse Gas Emissions reduction target of at least 40 per cent by 2020 based on 1990 levels.

The Clerk having announced that the terms of the petition would be recorded in Hansard and a copy referred to the appropriate minister for response pursuant to standing order 100, the petition was received.

Leave of absence

Motion (by Mr Corbell) proposed:

That leave of absence be granted to Mr Stanhope for the period 19 to 28 October 2010 for personal reasons.

MR HANSON (Molonglo) (10.02): At the outset I would like to speak on this motion and say that the opposition will be granting leave to Mr Stanhope. But I think it is important to make a few comments and put them in the Hansard, with respect to both Mr Stanhope’s leave and also to the pairing arrangements which have been discussed in the media.

We will be supporting the leave because obviously Mr Stanhope does not deserve to lose his seat, which would be the consequence if leave was not granted. But my colleagues and I are bitterly disappointed that the Chief Minister has decided to prioritise a holiday in Europe over his responsibilities to the Assembly. As we are aware, the Assembly sits for just 14 weeks a year, and for the Chief Minister to have essentially decided that he is going to avoid two weeks of the sitting rather than

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