Page 2433 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 6 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
He also raised the issue of the renal unit; he complained about that and how it might hold up the whole process. In fact, the renal unit is an important part of the Royal Canberra Hospital site and if a Residents Rally policy was to be considered amongst the options the renal unit had to stay there. A Residents Rally policy was considered among the options, so I do not know why the Residents Rally is whingeing. In relation to the review, it was a review of all of the information that is well known. If Mr Humphries had wanted to make a submission in relation to it, it would have reached those reviewing the hospital redevelopment plan.
Mr Humphries: I did not want to make a submission; I want to see the result.
MR BERRY: There was nothing to consult on because I was not conducting the review; a team was.
Mr Humphries: You could have told them to consult.
MR BERRY: I did not have a request from you. It is a bit late to start whingeing now. It is all over. In any event, the Government will consider the matter closely and I will announce its decision next week. We will press on from there with the provision of quality hospital services that are accessible to all people in the ACT across the board.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I seek leave to make a personal explanation under standing order 46.
MR SPEAKER: Do you claim to have been misrepresented?
MR HUMPHRIES: Yes, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: Please proceed.
MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, Mr Berry implied, in his comments about his cover-up of the document that we were debating just a moment ago, that his failure to release that document to the public gaze or to members of the Assembly can be justified on the basis that I similarly covered up other documents. Mr Speaker, the fact of life is that the documents to which Mr Berry referred - the master development control plan and the functional plan of the hospital redevelopment - at the time he sought them, were not available because they were not yet ready. The documents were not in existence. The document that we debated just a moment ago is in existence. It has been in existence for more than a week and ought to have been presented to this Assembly and to the public. There is a very clear distinction, and I think Mr Berry should acknowledge his obligation and release it forthwith.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .