Page 4598 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 20 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Speaker, I do not think that I need to speak at great length. I think that Mr Berry has made the case against himself. He clearly demonstrated that he believes - his last remarks exemplify this - that giving no answer is good enough for this Assembly.
I think that the rest of the members, the non-government members at least, do not accept that; they do not agree with it. Mr Berry has shown no inclination even to suggest that he will take a different tack in the future. He has not even given a commitment along the lines that Mr Moore has sought; that, in exchange for some commitment from Mr Berry to provide information, we would not proceed with this censure motion. He even declined to accede to that.
MR BERRY (Minister for Health and Minister for Sport) (5.16): Mr Speaker, this is another measure of political grandstanding. The Labor Party has known about this since yesterday because it was widely circulated that this was about to occur. This attack is a measure of one's success. This is the price you pay for being effective. If you are effective in government and you are in a minority, you are asking for trouble - and that is what this is about. This is an effective government. We were effective in opposition. This is the price we pay.
Mr Speaker, I will read from the motion. It contains these words, "in contempt of the Assembly and its committees". That is an absolute outrage. I asked for some information on some questions to be brought down to me, just to demonstrate the level of questioning at the Estimates Committee. The Estimates Committee process in this place has developed to the stage where a tirade of questions are fired at Ministers and officials. That is okay; that is the pace that has been set in this place and members and Ministers expect that. Whether members asking the questions like the answers or not does not warrant a censure motion. The point is whether they get the answers or not.
I see that there were 54 questions put to me which I took on notice. They were taken on 9, 10 and 16 October. Most responses were tabled between 16 and 22 October. Seven were tabled between 29 October and 6 November. Besides all of the information which was asked of me in the formal proceedings, there were 54 detailed questions which had to be answered by my departmental officers. They are significant answers which require a lot of work. I will give you a demonstration. I will flick through a couple here and give you a demonstration of the types of questions that were asked and the answers that were given.
This question - it does not say who it was asked by - asked for an estimate of the number of women in the ACT dependent on tranquillisers; details of the number of clients involved in COPE; what type of service; any waiting list; evaluation plans; and why the service is not available to men. The answer goes like this:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .