Page 1948 - Week 07 - Thursday, 31 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
would recall, that on occasions many more questions were answered by Labor when in government. In fact, on one occasion the then Chief Minister, Rosemary Follett, fielded 19 questions - that was without the questions that were asked of the other Ministers. Mr Speaker, that was because Labor would accommodate interrogation and was not frightened of it. The Government opposite is terrified of interrogation. It is quite easy to see that because of the lack of information that has been in their responses to the questions put to them by the Labor Opposition - waffling, extended answers and ministerial statements. Ministerial statements have become the order of the day. Ten questions were answered by the entire Government from all of the members opposite.
Mr Speaker, I am not responsible for the tardiness of the Chief Minister. If he wants to waffle on all day and not come forward with any information, I cannot help that. If he is slow off the mark, that is a problem for the Chief Minister and the Government, not the Labor Opposition. It is not a problem for the Speaker, but it is a problem for the people of the ACT because the Minister and his Government avoid interrogation. What needs to happen is that, as a result of that interrogation we can use the information that we glean in pursuing our proper role as an Opposition; that is, to keep the Government in line.
There were 10 or 11 questions answered today. This is an outrageous performance by the Government in comparison to the performance of Labor when it was in government. There were 19 questions fielded in question time by the then Chief Minister herself; that was without the other Ministers.
Mr Kaine: I have matched her performance since I have been here.
MR BERRY: I think you have got a long way to go. There are ways and means of explaining that, but they would probably be out of order in this place.
Mr Speaker, the issue that is before the house is the suspension of standing orders to allow the Chief Minister to give his ministerial statement. It is true that it is not common for the Labor Party to oppose leave being granted, but in this case, because of the tardiness and the tiredness of the Government opposite, it was necessary. It was also necessary because the Chief Minister needs to understand that such matters as suspensions of standing orders to accommodate Opposition wishes may well become more the order of the day because of his own behaviour in relation to yesterday's issue about scrutiny of the Government. It was very carefully avoided by the Government to save embarrassment, because they were embarrassed. They were found out. I can understand why they are twitchy. I can understand why the Chief Minister is twitchy. It is sometimes embarrassing to be interrogated but this is an important issue and it is important that this motion is not carried.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .