Page 2546 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 23 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries: No, this was not in public hearing. This was during a private hearing. I think, Madam Speaker, that it is fair enough to report what happened in a public hearing. After all, everyone was present. But to report on the private deliberations, even if he does have a somewhat strange memory of them, is a little bit improper, given that those committee hearings do take place in private.
MR BERRY: Madam Speaker, I am - - -
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Berry, just wait a minute. Let us give the Clerk a minute to check the precedents on this matter. I will then proceed to give Mr Humphries a response. Otherwise it may be deemed to be discourteous.
MR BERRY: How about if I drop the issue and do not put anybody to any trouble? All I am trying to do is draw attention to the efforts of the chair in containing some of the enthusiasm of the Liberals opposite in their pursuit of a political point or two.
MADAM SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Berry. Proceed.
MR BERRY: I congratulate her for not allowing Mrs Carnell to get away with those hypotheticals in the public hearings.
We come now to some of the recommendations. I think that, if you look at the language which precedes many of the recommendations, you will see that there is so much rhetoric. I think Mr Moore was saying that it was a report that could be critical of the Government and could be positive at the same time, or something like that. Of course, he said in muted tones that everything was okay in the report except for something that might be a little bit questionable, and I think he was referring to health promotion recommendations.
Mr Moore: No, not at all. I am very comfortable with everything that is in the report. Everything that is in there is okay.
MR BERRY: Throughout it there were attempts to blacken Ministers. Take the issue of the time lost through industrial disputes. Very clearly, there was an attempt by the Liberals to blacken the Minister responsible for industrial relations. Fortunately, members were able to turn that around. It was an attempt by the Liberals to misinterpret what Mr Lamont had said. At paragraph 4.10 on page 21 of the report, the committee went on to say:
The Committee further notes that these figures could be subject to different interpretation, the ACT recording the fourth highest number of working days lost per thousand employees in 1993.
What Mr Lamont had said was true; but earlier the Liberals had tried to create another impression.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .