Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 257 ..

MR SPEAKER: I do uphold the point of order and I make the point - - -

MR BERRY: You surprise me.

MR SPEAKER: I will ignore that.

MR BERRY: Why?

MR SPEAKER: I make the point, however, Mr Berry, that, a bit like Zion, “Glorious things of thee are spoken”. I am sure that you are quite capable of bringing what you wish to say within the context of Ms Horodny's motion.

MR BERRY: Indeed I do.

MR SPEAKER: Please bring them within that motion, and I am sure that we will all be very happy.

MR BERRY: Let me connect them. Ms Horodny's amendment makes no sense without the motion being passed, and there is opposition to the motion. Therefore, that opposition needs to be put away as well. Having made that connection, Mr Speaker, I have heard Mr Moore say that he will not be supporting this motion. He ought to reconsider his position because the Liberals opposite do not have a good record of sticking to their promises. What happened to the full and open consultation that was going to occur on this matter? Mrs Carnell bleats now that she will provide that consultation and make sure that everybody is aware. We would not have been in this bind if it had happened beforehand. That is the real problem.

I do not believe, and neither do my Labor colleagues, that Mrs Carnell can be relied upon to stick to her word. You see, we have heard it before. In relation to the motion that has been put before this chamber, it sends a very clear message that this chamber has a point of view about what ought to happen in relation to those two sites. It is not what the Liberals and Mr Moore or the Liberals and Mr Osborne have agreed to between themselves. It is a statement from this Assembly that is a very clear one. It would include those words which have been put forward by Ms Horodny because they make it very clear that there can be work done in relation to those environmental factors.

I say, again, that it is important for people to consider those issues. Do they want this Assembly to make a clear statement about these issues, given that there has been a lot of debate about it, and to make sure that the Government has very clear riding instructions and there can be no question about those riding instructions; or do they want a position where just a few of them have sat down and between themselves reached an agreement which may or may not stick? There has been, if you like, a contract with the community by the Liberals on the issue of consultation that has been breached. That clearly has been breached.

Mr Hird: That is only your interpretation.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .