Page 2585 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
should congratulate those businesses in these recessionary times - even though we are emerging from that recession and we are assured of continuing that emergence with the re-election of the Keating Government next year. The continued support of the ACT business community is something which I personally applaud and which my colleagues applaud. I certainly hope that businesses in the ACT continue to provide that support, because it is important that they become more involved in the education process. This is one extremely clear and decisive way in which that participation can be demonstrated.
Madam Speaker, I could take a cheap shot, which I am not normally prone to do. This is really the difference between us and them. Ms Ellis talks about the success. It could be said that some people opposite talk about the also-rans, but that is not the issue we wish to draw attention to. It was the contribution of all of the schools involved in this program that made it a success. The fact that so many schools were prepared to be involved made this program the success that it was. I congratulate Ms Ellis on raising the issue and raising the consciousness of this Assembly about this most deserving program which was won this year by Lake Tuggeranong College.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (10.54): Madam Speaker, I will speak briefly. I agree with Mr Cornwell that this is a pointless motion. Paragraph (1) is a good thing which Ms Ellis could easily have dealt with in a five-minute statement in the adjournment debate, which would have been appropriate for this kind of thing. The second part of her motion, however, is a slightly different thing. I notice, Madam Speaker, that it does not recognise the initiatives of the ACT Follett Labor Government. Indeed, if Ms Ellis had done that, she would have invited criticism, because programs encouraging energy efficiency in our community have been going on for a long time, not only under the Follett Labor Government either. If we want to pat ourselves on the back and say how great we are because we have introduced energy efficiencies over a series of governments, that is okay, I suppose. But why do we want to do it? Who is kidding whom? Are we world leaders in this field? I do not think so. In fact, we are doing what any sensible government would do. It was done under the Alliance Government - it was started before that - and has continued under the Follett Labor Government. That is fine.
But there is one part of this motion that I am not sure Ms Ellis understood when she wrote it. She is asking us to recognise the initiatives of the Government in the use of fuel. I do not quite know what that means. Is she congratulating the Follett Labor Government on policies that generate the use of additional fuel?
Ms Ellis: Fuel and energy efficiency. Read the sentence.
MR KAINE: Energy efficiency is a different thing. There are two thoughts there. One is the use of fuel; the other is energy efficiency. You do not use energy efficiency. Read your own sentence - read Ros's sentence. I presume that Ros wrote it for you. I do not think it says what you intended it to say. I do not know that I particularly want to pat myself on the back - and if I were to support this motion in its present form I would be doing so - for encouraging the use of fuel. Which fuel are we encouraging the use of - electrical energy, natural gas, petroleum products or coal? I do not know that I am encouraging the use of fuel. In fact, I hope that we would discourage the use of fuel so that we generate less of the gases that are destroying the ozone layer.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .