Page 4716 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
to act, and that is the problem. That is why we are asking for it today. That is why we are saying we want it by February next year.
At the estimates hearings I asked, “Is there an attractions strategy?” What does Mr Barr say? “We’re not in the business of business welfare.” You only have to look at the last term of the federal Liberal government to see that in 2001 we finally got a national museum. It had been on the agenda for 20 years. We were quite lucky then to get the National Portrait Gallery.
This is the typical defence of the minister—he says I’m calling on the ACT purse. No, I am not. I am saying let us have a strategy. Let us work out what the holes are. Let us work out what the opportunities are. Let us work out what the potential is. Let us work out what is missing and start lobbying for these things. If we can help contribute to it, then so be it. But unless we are talking about it, unless we have a strategy and unless we know what is missing and what might possibly work in the ACT, it is not going to happen, and that is the problem with this minister.
This motion calls for two actions: first, the ACT government to provide a response to the findings of the Loxton report; second, to reinforce the call that I made at the estimates hearings this year that the minister for tourism set out an annual plan for events and festivals, provide a plan by which the ACT can encourage new attractions to become established in the ACT and provide a plan for all types of accommodation in the ACT.
Debate interrupted in accordance with standing order 74 and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for a later hour.
Sitting suspended from 12.26 to 2 pm.
Questions without notice
Insurance—common law damages claims
MR SESELJA: My question is to the Attorney-General. The exposure drafts of the Workers Compensation Amendment Bill 2010 and the Road Transport (Third-Party Insurance) Amendment Bill 2010 seek to introduce thresholds below which an injured party would not be eligible to make a common law damages claim. Attorney, on 23 June 2006, you gave a keynote address to the Australian Lawyers Alliance (ACT Branch), conference. In that speech, did you indicate that the ACT government would not be introducing thresholds or caps or similar changes to access to common law? If yes, did those statements reflect government policy on the matter? If no, what did you say in relation to that matter?
MR CORBELL: That speech was, it sounds like, four years ago. I would have to go and check the record.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, a supplementary?
MR SESELJA: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Attorney, since your speech on 23 June 2006, has the government changed its policy not to limit the rights of injured people to damages at common law. If yes, when did that policy change and why? If no, to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video