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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 11 Hansard (Wednesday, 20 October 2010) . . Page.. 4699 ..

will give her leave. It is very interesting to say, “Listen to what she said.” She said, “I got a briefing and I had a little word and I was given some assurances.”

What was Mr Doszpot’s besetting failure in this whole matter? He did not go to the department first and get his riding orders from the department. His besetting failure was that he did not seek a briefing from the department to see the obvious. Mr Doszpot’s actions have been implicitly and explicitly criticised by the leader of the Greens today.

Mr Doszpot, who listened, who saw the issues, who advocated on behalf of people, who got a result, a partial result, is the bogeyman in this issue. He is the bogeyman in this issue because he did not actually go to the department and get his riding instructions from the department first and foremost. He listened to the people. He listened to the people and he took his riding instructions from the people who pay his salary. The people who pay his wages came to him and said, “We have got a problem,” and he acted on it. He did not bother to be cowed and put in his place like Ms Hunter was.

Ms Hunter’s approach has been so ineffective that it has been an embarrassment. She has come in here today and highlighted the Greens’ embarrassing performance on this issue—the party of the disadvantaged, the party of the downtrodden, the party that wants to bring us a softer polity, a more caring polity. I do not know that the people of the ACT are going to be very convinced about the softer kind of polity brought to the people of the ACT by the ACT Greens when blind children and deaf children and their concerns are cast aside on the basis of saying, “We had a briefing from the department and it is all right.” This is a disgrace and does not deserve any support at all.

MR DOSZPOT (Brindabella) (11.29): I listened to Ms Hunter regarding her amendment. I am astounded at the amendment in the first place. The preamble, the discussion and the speech that she gave surrounding her rationale for this, I find incredible.

Ms Hunter, you asked whether we listened to your speech. I listened to your speech intently, Ms Hunter. You are not listening now.

MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Doszpot, could you please refer your comments through me, not directly to Ms Hunter.

MR DOSZPOT: Of course, Madam Deputy Speaker. Ms Hunter, I did listen to your speech. But, Ms Hunter, I note you are not listening to mine at the moment. There are a couple of points that I would really like to make that I think you should be aware of. The proposed cuts are telling in what this government wants to do to our most vulnerable. There are 40 proposed reductions in departmental branches with support and/or student responsibilities, as opposed to 11.5 proposed cuts in departmental branches with non-support responsibilities, Ms Hunter. So for all of your caring and sharing propaganda that you put out about how much you worry about the vulnerable in our community, is this not one of the most indicative factors? You are endorsing the government’s attitude to our most vulnerable.

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