Page 2261 - Week 08 - Thursday, 7 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine's immediate reaction to me on the day when I had those domestic violence crisis workers in my office was to say, "Give me a submission out of the Treasurer's advance and I will see what I can do". That is a straight, off-the-cuff commitment to matters of concern in the community. Mr Stevenson says that this Chief Minister does not have proper regard for the situation of women in society. That is bunkum, Mr Speaker. That is simply not true. I have seen sufficient evidence of his genuine concern for women and the women's movement and the protection of women to know that there is no substance in that attack. That is a comprehensive answer to Mr Stevenson.
I believe that Mr Stevenson will use the remainder of this debate to run his X-rated issues. I challenge Mr Stevenson to move to the real issues before this Assembly. I challenge Mr Stevenson to indicate where his own views lie on the issue of prostitution, where his views lie on the issue of anti-Semitism, where his views lie on the issue of the multifunction polis, where his views lie on such issues as the freeing of Nelson Mandela. I invite Mr Stevenson to give us his real agenda. We have been waiting for months now. Why do we have to go through it sequentially? We had the multifunction polis for a time, and other issues. Now it is pornography. What will it be next?
Mr Speaker, the Government's decision to regulate the X-rated video industry was a decision to do what could be done as the result of a vote in this house. It is a reasoned response and the best practical solution to the vote carried democratically in this Assembly. It was made very clear by the Government that it would not carry a taxing Bill, a franchising Bill, unless the regulatory Act was first passed. That was stated publicly and was clearly evidenced by the recent proceedings in this Assembly. The opposition that members had to a franchising Bill simpliciter in November was just that - that taxing should not precede a regulation of the industry. Much of what Mr Stevenson has quoted as hypocrisy and lack of credibility falls on that argument. The fact is that I have continued, right to the last days here, to oppose a taxing on the industry unless it is first regulated. That was the view of many people in the Alliance.
Mr Speaker, the November views really reflect the vicissitudes of political office - that government is the art of the achievable. I believe that the majority of Canberra people support the legislation that has been passed in this Assembly recently. Though the video industry says that the tax is punitive in its size, I must say that some of us had to hold back the Chief Minister, because you would have been surprised at what level of tax he would have liked to impose on the industry. You have picked the wrong target, Mr Stevenson, and you have picked the wrong issue again. It is unfair to attack a hardworking, decent, leading politician in this country on a single issue.
MR CONNOLLY (11.20): Mr Speaker, the Opposition rises to support this want of confidence resolution this morning, not because we agree with Mr Stevenson's view on the X-rated video industry but because, on examining his motion, we cannot disagree that the Government's behaviour on this issue demonstrates a lack of integrity, a lack of credibility, and extreme hypocrisy.
The Opposition's view on X-rated videos is clear. We can say that those on this side of the house - and we must include Mr Moore in this - have maintained a consistent view on this throughout, as indeed has Mr Stevenson. We are the only people in the Assembly to have remained consistent on this issue.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .