Page 3699 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 23 October 2013

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

healthier and smarter community; growing a stronger and more diverse economy; and focusing on urban renewal as our city grows. These are key themes of the policies the Greens took to the last ACT election. I am pleased that, through the combined work of the Greens and the Labor Party in this government, they continue to be points of focus. They are the issues we need to focus on for the future of this city, and I am very pleased to be a part of helping to deliver some of those outcomes.

As I said at the start, I will not be supporting Mr Hanson’s amendment. I simply disagree with some of it. I mean, Mr Hanson cannot seriously expect this to get support. The flinging around of ideological labels, which is a bit old school, is just not going to happen. I am amused by a trend that has emerged this sitting week, and it will be interesting to see if it keeps happening—Mr Hanson, the great interjector, the man who hectors consistently in this chamber, has taken to naming out when somebody from the other side of the chamber dares to interject. This is from a man with a long history of interjecting, but now he has taken a pious stance—I guess he wants to get it on the Hansard so that it is recorded for posterity—of saying, “Oh, Mr Barr is interjecting,” like it is a shock and a horror. For as long as I have been in this chamber, this is a man who has been the great, renowned interjector. In fact, he is shown to have the biggest glass jaw in the place. It will be interesting to see whether this trend continues because it is one of the most ironic things I have seen in this place for quite some time.

I thank Dr Bourke for bringing forward this motion today. It has been useful to reflect both on some of the things that have been achieved but also some of the challenges that remain ahead of us. I look forward to continuing to contribute to taking on those challenges.

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 12.25 to 2.30 pm.

Questions without notice

Alexander Maconochie Centre—capacity

MR HANSON: My question is to the Minister for Corrections. Minister, in answers to questions about the AMC over the past three years, the government has used a variety of terms to describe the number of prisoners to be accommodated. These terms have included “maximum capacity”, “actual bed numbers”, “prisoner numbers” “operational capacity” and “actual daily numbers”. In your ministerial statement released yesterday, you introduced two new terms—“raw accommodation number”, which is 366, and “actual daily numbers”, 343. Minister, is 366 the “maximum capacity”, is it the “actual bed numbers”, is it “actual daily numbers”, is it the “prisoner numbers”, is it “the operational capacity” or is it something else?

MR RATTENBURY: I am happy to try and assist Mr Hanson with his uncertainty. The figures that I spoke of yesterday—

Mr Coe interjecting—

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