Page 3812 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 16 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR BERRY: I am dealing with that very issue, Mr Speaker, because I am talking about the need to be given time to lobby some of the less sensible members in this Assembly in order that we can convince them that they ought to vote against this motion, because it is a silly motion. So, I am indeed addressing the point.
Mr Humphries: Name them.
MR BERRY: Well, I think I could work on Gary Humphries. A little bit of work is required there; but I am prepared to put the effort in, because I am a hard worker, and everybody knows that.
Mr Jensen: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker: Relevance.
MR SPEAKER: Please proceed, Mr Berry. You are overruled, Mr Jensen.
MR BERRY: Mr Kaine I am not prepared to work on; he is just plain stubborn. But, seriously, this is an issue that ought to lie on the table until people have a bit more time to think about it. It is an inquiry that has run out of time now. The decisions of the board in respect of bed numbers will not become evident until about 27 November. That is a loose figure, because a lot of issues have to be addressed between now and that time, in terms of the Government's budget.
If this committee of inquiry were to proceed, it would just make a mockery out of the whole system. Whilst it might be fine for Mr Humphries to grandstand on the issue - and we can all cope with that - it just seems to me a complete and utter waste of time and, more importantly, a complete and utter waste of this Assembly's resources, which might otherwise be used sensibly. They are not going to achieve a result for this Assembly. All they are going to do is achieve a political result for a few people who want to grandstand on the issue. I think this ought to lie on the table until people have a bit more time to reflect on the issues.
MR MOORE (12.39): This motion follows very quickly on the motion to gag the debate, which I voted against. The reason I voted against it was that I felt that we needed to explore a little further what the possibilities were. We had an amendment circulated by Mr Connolly. I thought it was important to explore the possibility of the Public Accounts Committee looking into this matter, rather than a select committee. The former is already established. Certainly, on previous occasions when I have suggested having committee inquiries, that is an argument that Mr Humphries himself has strongly advocated. Mr Kaine also has argued that, if there is a committee that can do the job, it ought to do it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .