Page 582 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 20 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
told. That is the consultation process. We were told last Friday that the house would not sit tonight. Now, I do not know what sort of consultative process that is.
Mr Jensen: You were advised.
MR WOOD: Oh, well, you have changed your word again. You have now advised us, not told us. Your advice means telling people. This is not the way the Follett Government used to run things. When Rosemary Follett was Chief Minister there was genuine consultation on what would happen. We had established the principle that Tuesday night was a sitting night. It was not a time that we could dispense with lightly. We understand that two Executive Deputies have important business tonight. Well, I want to make the claim that the business of this Assembly is more important than the business of two Executive Deputies. Our business takes priority.
If this principle is established, is it likely that we will turn up tomorrow to be told, "We're not going to sit on Thursday. Someone wants to go for a picnic down the road somewhere". That is a logical consequence of what you are saying. You make these decisions off the top of your head, and the whole business of the Assembly, whether it is Government business, Assembly business, or private members' business, loses its priority.
Today we wrote a letter to the Speaker. I assume he received it, though the Assembly - and this party in particular has not had the courtesy of a reply from the Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition tells me that there was a reply to her, whereas I certainly expected one to the house in general. But I do protest at the notion that we do away with our Tuesday night sitting. It is the only time that the working people in the ACT can come here and hear what is being done. It is a time we should not cede lightly. I certainly hope that this is no precedent for what may happen in the future.
MR KAINE (Chief Minister) (5.13): Mr Speaker, I do not often get up to debate the adjournment motion, but I feel that Mr Wood's remarks warrant some response. I would have felt more comfortable with Mr Wood's approach were it not for a couple of circumstances, of which I am sure he is well aware.
The first is that this is not the first time that this Assembly has not met on a Tuesday night. When the Follett-Whalan Government was in place there were occasions when the Assembly did not meet on the Tuesday night because it was convenient to the Government not to meet. Since we do not have a pairing arrangement, if that occurs the only course of action open to the Government is to adjourn the Assembly. This is not a precedent, it was done before under the Follett-Whalan Government. So what is fair for one Government is presumably fair for the other.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .