Page 1512 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 2 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Speaker, will I now be drawn to order, since I am on warning, if I make a comment about Mr Duby's accusation that I am scared of Dr Kinloch? I would like to respond to that as part of the debate because I think that is appropriate. If I may proceed on that then just a little nod from you that I am going too far will be enough for me. I shall be careful not to make any imputation.
Mr Collaery: On a point of order, Mr Speaker; I find the suggestion by that member thoroughly improper. It is unparliamentary and it is an offence to your - - -
Mrs Grassby: Oh, for goodness' sake; what number, what number?
Mr Collaery: Standing order 202.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you for your observation, Mr Collaery. Mr Moore, it is not my position to tell you what you are to say. You go for your life, and I will pull you up if necessary.
MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, I shall just state that I certainly am not scared of Dr Kinloch in any sense. The protection that his fellow colleagues are attempting to offer him indicates that they have little faith in his parliamentary ability. Really, it is his choice; if he does not enjoy politics, if he cannot handle politics, then he has the option to leave, especially with our electoral system under which another member from his own party would be appointed. I just point out that he has that option and it is not our responsibility to look after his sensitivities. I shall be bringing up any other matter with Dr Kinloch during the normal parliamentary process.
Mr Collaery took a great deal of time to point out a mandate. He attempted to suggest that a mandate required the voters' veto. Mr Collaery seems to have forgotten some of the issues on which the community based party went to the electorate. It went to the electorate - and I was a part of that - on the basis of consultation.
What we have here is a decision that was made with absolutely no consultation, and that has been admitted by Mr Duby. This is a bad decision, an horrific decision, because it reflects their attitude to the people of Canberra - and this is the biggest problem with the decision. It is not based on a good, sound, financial basis that he can demonstrate even to this Assembly, let alone to the public. It has got none of that basis. He should say, "I have made a mistake; I blew it; open the Ainslie Transfer Station", and then go through the process that is put forward in this motion.
This motion has a very positive aspect to it. It is not just saying, "This is terrible". It even suggests a way of going about providing future moves to close the transfer station if it is necessary. If there is a reason, then
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .