Page 3126 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 12 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: Relevance. The mockery of the proposed appointment of another independent committee of inquiry is hardly relevant to the motion that has been put by Mr Stevenson.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: I do not think it is necessarily irrelevant again, Mr Berry; so continue, Mr Collaery.
MR COLLAERY: Thank you. Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe that Mr Stevenson is to be thanked for moving this motion; he should be thanked for it. Of course, when he put the matter on the business paper he was not aware that there would be a full and independent inquiry. I am certain that Mr Stevenson can maintain a proper communication line with Mr Humphries and make known any of his views on the terms of reference and issues of that nature.
Certainly, I believe that the community's perception of the Assembly will be enhanced if this is given out to an eminent Australian for independent analysis and inquiry on the economic and social issues outlined by Mr Humphries. I believe that this is a great day for this debate and it should be accepted in good grace by the Opposition. Mr Deputy Speaker, I have discussed this matter with my colleague Dr Kinloch, and he thoroughly supports this proposal by Mr Humphries and is of the view that it should take precedence over the proposal by Mr Stevenson at this stage.
Mr Moore: I raise a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Under standing order 46, I have a personal explanation to make.
Mr Collaery: At the end of the debate.
Mr Moore: I am quite happy to wait until the end of the debate.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, thank you, Mr Moore. Yes, that is correct.
MS FOLLETT (Leader of the Opposition) (12.14): Mr Deputy Speaker, I think that to the casual observer this debate must seem very strange indeed because members of the Government seem completely unaware that the issue that we are debating is, in fact, Mr Stevenson's proposal to refer the matter of school closures to the Standing Committee on Social Policy. It is a fact, Mr Deputy Speaker, that there is no alternative proposal before this Assembly.
In his remarks, Mr Humphries seemed to indicate that there was, in fact, a proposal - his so-called independent inquiry - and, of course, Mr Collaery also addressed all of his remarks towards that inquiry as well. But the fact is that there is only one proposal before the Assembly. I think that it is really up to the Government members to debate the proposal that is before us, not to put forward some hypothetical situation which they believe, and I cannot believe, obviates the need for this motion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .