Page 31 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 16 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
rejecting without negotiation the Gungahlin urban village. At the same time, he has made unclear and incomplete references to urban villages and light rail systems as being a good idea. What happened to the idea that he had in front of him? Vague references to urban villages are no substitute for a real village - a plan that has met with universal acclaim from planners and one that is being used as a model for developments elsewhere.
It is sad to think that the reputation of Canberra as a planned city will be enhanced by what it exports rather than by what it puts on the ground for its own community at home. The planning of the city cannot be left to a government so lacking in ideas, decisiveness and activity that it would casually reject a well-articulated and profitable proposal benefiting the people of the ACT, not only in terms of buildings, roads, new transport systems and the like, but by $300m in cash as well. I have to ask: Where is the planning vision beyond the Y plan?
The MPI speaks of lost opportunities and lack of vision. There is evidence on all sides that this Government has perpetrated a fraud on our community. It has presumed to create the impression that it has a view of the future that this Territory, our community, might have. Instead, we have been given nothing - - -
Mr Berry: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I think "perpetrated a fraud" is a bit over the top and ought to be withdrawn. As a member of the Government, I can assure this chamber that there are no frauds being perpetrated by me or any of my colleagues, and it ought to be withdrawn.
Mr Kaine: If he had not cut me off and used up my time, I was explaining why it was a fraud, Madam Speaker. Under those circumstances, if he thinks I am going to withdraw it, he is wrong.
Mr Connolly: On the point of order, Madam Speaker: You have not actually ruled on that. Mr Kaine rather bombastically says, "If he thinks I will withdraw, he is wrong".
Mr Kaine: I said, "If he thinks", Madam Speaker; I said nothing about you.
Mr Connolly: I am sure that he is not pre-empting your ruling, Madam Speaker, and I am sure that if you were to rule against him he would indeed withdraw. But he should clarify that, because it is prima facie a contempt of the Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: The standing orders do not allow you to impute improper motives to individuals in the Assembly, Mr Kaine.
Mr Kaine: I did not impute improper motives, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: However, it is bordering on the unparliamentary to impute an improper motive to the Government.
Mr Kaine: I do not think it borders on anything.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Kaine, I believe that you should consider those words. Rather than asking you to withdraw them at this moment, perhaps you can consider them and we may consider a ruling which will determine that those types of words which impute improper motives will not be put.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .