Page 3542 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 12 September 2017
The quickest way that we could lose our credit rating, of course, would be, for example, to seek to rip up a contract for a major infrastructure project. That would be one way that we could do that. But there is only one party in this chamber that has taken to an election that policy approach of ripping up not only a contract but the territory’s credit rating. We saw the result of that.
MADAM SPEAKER: Before we go to further questions without notice, I want to acknowledge in the chamber Mr Hargreaves, a former member of this place. Welcome back!
Questions without notice
MR WALL: My question is to the Chief Minister. The citizens jury on compulsory third-party insurance will, according to the government’s frequently asked questions handbook, “hear from a range of experts and consider evidence, including the community feedback and survey results”. Feedback will be published online and the jury’s deliberations will be open to the public but places will be limited. Chief Minister, will all of the evidence provided to the citizens jury, including presentations by experts, be made public online, and if not, why not?
MR BARR: It would certainly be my hope. We cannot control the format or nature of every single piece of evidence or contribution that would be made. But where people present, and do so in a format that would allow for that information to go on the website, I have no problem with that.
MR WALL: Chief Minister, will the jury’s deliberations be made public on line or in any other form?
MR BARR: Again, perhaps subject to reasonable limitations of technology and capability; I do not think it will be a Big Brother episode but, again, members of the jury will no doubt have a range of discussions and deliberations and reach a conclusion.
MS LEE: Chief Minister, what other processes, in addition to making the evidence public, are in place to ensure that the information provided to the citizens jury is accurate, balanced and comprehensive?
MR BARR: These are matters that can, of course, be subject to a variety of different opinions. In this day and age there is even conjecture over what constitutes a fact or what might be real news or what might be fake news. But I am certain that in this process we have given the stakeholders the variety of opportunities that there will be for all the different perspectives in this debate to be put before the jury. This Assembly, and indeed the broader Canberra community, can have confidence that the jury members will be able to hear from a wide variety of perspectives.