Page 5224 - Week 17 - Thursday, 13 December 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD: That is interesting. I will say this: the Administration will continue because you have Ministers running departments, but you have no Government because you have no Cabinet that is meeting. If you cannot make that clear distinction you should be ashamed of the position you have occupied for so long in ignorance. The Government stops for six to seven weeks, and that is absolutely unacceptable. Again, by their actions, these Ministers are bringing this Assembly into disrepute. It is no wonder the ACT community has lost respect for the Government. It is not surprising that the value of self-government, the need for self-government, has not yet been conveyed to the community - because of your actions.
Mr Collaery: What are you doing for self-government now, Bill?
MR WOOD: I will be here. I will be working. I will take a few days off and that is it - and I am an Opposition member. Mr Collaery interjects, but he will not be holding any Cabinet meetings. There will be no decisions made, other than the purely administrative processes of departments, and he tries to say that we have a government. You are truly ignorant. It is about time you knew a little more than you do about parliament and about government. I regret the fact that this parliament, because of this Government, has been unable to accept the leadership role that it should have in convincing the ACT people that we need self-government.
They claim government will be continuing; but they demonstrate their ignorance, led by Mr Kaine when he cannot make up his mind about what happens while he is away. On the one hand, in answer to one question, he said that no public servant could be sacked; Mr Collaery cannot get his hands on them. Later on, in the same answer, he softened that by saying that he had confidence about the safety and security of public servants. He cannot seem to read the Act under which we operate. On the one hand he said no to Mrs Grassby's questions about decision making in all areas of Government policy. He said that there will not be, in his response. But the Act clearly specifies that the Deputy Chief Minister does have some powers in that respect. So you do not know how the Government should go. You do not know the technicalities, and you do not know the principles that have long applied.
The Chief Minister should have acted in this matter long ago. He should have done two things: first of all, he should have said to himself, "I think three weeks is a reasonable period of time that I, as Chief Minister, can be away". He should have contained his holidays simply to three weeks. I believe that that is an appropriate period of time. Secondly, when he learned that Mr Humphries was going away, he should have said quite clearly, simply and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .