Page 5188 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 27 October 2010

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

why I commend Mrs Dunne’s motion. It sets out a sensible path. It outlines a way forward where the government and the Assembly say to the federal government and the Murray-Darling Basin Authority: “We should not be treated like this. The people of the ACT should have their fair share of water. What is currently being proposed is not fair.” So I commend Mrs Dunne’s motion to the Assembly.

Mr Rattenbury’s amendments to Mr Corbell’s proposed amendments negatived.

Question put:

That Mr Corbell’s revised amendments be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 8

Noes 5

Mr Barr

Ms Hunter

Mr Doszpot

Mr Smyth

Mr Corbell

Ms Le Couteur

Mrs Dunne

Ms Gallagher

Ms Porter

Mr Hanson

Mr Hargreaves

Mr Rattenbury

Mr Seselja

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendments agreed to.

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (4:32): This is an important issue and I want to pick up on something that the minister said. He said there are a range of issues that we need clarification on. And there is no doubt about that. One of the things that my staff and I have been doing fairly diligently since this report came out is trying to get across the documentation, to get an understanding of what is going on and to seek briefings and get an understanding of other players’ views in this matter. I have sought a briefing from a range of people. We have been seeking on behalf of the Canberra Liberals to be as fully informed as possible.

At the outset I asked the minister’s office for a briefing, which has not yet been forthcoming. I know that the departmental staff are still trying to get across many of these issues but I urge the minister to at least provide a preliminary briefing early in the piece. I know that people’s level of understanding will change over time. These are important issues.

I thank the minister for his offer to reach out and have a multiparty approach and a multiparty agreement on this. I think that there has been some misunderstanding. This is not what we were seeking to do today but rather to set that in train. We were not going to say today that we, the Assembly, were going to draw a line in the sand and say, “This is what we will do, nothing more and nothing less.” I think that is something that will have to evolve over time. Although the multiparty approach has been excluded from my motion, I do thank the minister for his offer to continue down that path because this is such an important issue and I will willingly participate in those discussions.

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