Page 773 - Week 03 - Thursday, 22 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Whilst I am remaining in this office that does not help the ACT itself to discharge its functions interstate. Clearly there is political gamesmanship, although I would much rather have seen us put through the Clinical Waste Bill today.
Whilst we had in mind to move after those important matters had been dealt with - after, I stress - a motion deploring these reprehensible activities of the Opposition, it is unfortunate that this sham censure motion was advanced before good business. I suggest, Mr Speaker, you must consider the effect this has on others in the house, and in particular Mr Moore. I suggest that, though he has lot of angst, he should consider again whether a lot of his conduct does much for the image of this Assembly. The reprehensible conduct outlined by the Chief Minister really should include moving the motion today and a number of comments made during that motion suggesting that I have malice and that I have maliciously set out to discharge my functions in a manner that does not befit it.
Whilst all these matters were going on I have agreed on some paperwork - just to give an example of the workload that we Ministers have - that we not intervene in some High Court proceedings at the moment. The fact is that we are working very hard on this side of the house and the reprehensible conduct that is thrown at us, the diversions each morning when we have to respond through the media to the most bizarre and outrageous news grabs that they go for, are really troubling. For some of us it starts early in the morning when we have to talk down the issues that this bunch raise. What it means is that the people of the ACT will question what we are doing for them. Quite frankly, if I showed some excesses of forensic zeal in early days, I can assure the house - as I did some months ago when we took Government - that I regret some of that excess and that I am putting my mind to the task. I believe that the Opposition, particularly Mr Whalan, has not given me the credit for that statement.
When I say reprehensible, I believe it is that type of conduct which results in undue public alarm. For Mr Whalan during debate to raise again the spectre that we might redevelop Northbourne Flats was most regrettable, and I trust that the media will be responsible with that matter because they themselves have seen the developments going on at Northbourne Flats. True to our Alliance policy there have been conversions of the laundry areas to disabled ground floor flats. We are not likely to have spent the $400,000 or $500,000 involved in that task were we minded to sell the premises and otherwise demolish them. It was truly reprehensible for Mrs Grassby to run this issue. I note that she has not yet spoken in this debate and I believe that is extremely significant.
Mr Speaker, I invite her to speak to this debate. I believe that the public are entitled to hear Mrs Grassby and I believe the public are entitled to hear an apology
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .