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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2254 ..

Mr Humphries: When they vote.

MR MOORE: Indeed, Mr Speaker, the duplicity is not missed by most. As much as Mr Humphries and others will attempt to do a little bit of a dance around it, the duplicity will not be missed by most. I imagine most will also be disappointed that they ever voted for a party that said, "We will be consultative and we will listen to the people. We will be open". Not only is that happening; at exactly the same time in Civic Square there is a huge rally to which nobody came. There were maybe 40 or 50 people, at the most, out there at that rally to support the view that you have put. There were 40 or 50 people there, and 40,000 signatures here. That gives you an impression of the view of people at the moment. You also argue, because I have heard you say it, "Yes, but there was another petition of some 30,000 signatures". I would not be surprised if some of the same people have signed both. Interestingly enough, they were consistent. It is consistent to sign both, because on the one hand people want to protect their shops and on the other hand they want to ensure that the retail hours remain as they are. .So, the solution is not necessarily with retail hours.

If the Government is going to continue its support of this motion then for heaven's sake recognise that the committee should be able to work in the best possible way it can. Leave us four months - I think the amendment is four months - to look at where the real solutions are and come back and report to this Assembly in a genuine and open way about shopping hours, about retail space and about all the other issues that you are putting there. At the same time, where the issues are not controversial - Mr Whitecross has spoken in detail about those - and where the committee says, "Yes, proceed with the advice you are giving to small business and all those issues because they are not controversial and there is no disagreement that they will assist", proceed with those. Where we are talking about the balance between retail space, shopping hours and so forth, then, for heaven's sake, leave those issues and allow the committee to look at them. In other words, do not force your legislation through this afternoon. That would be showing good faith.

Mrs Carnell: Retail space is in there.

MR MOORE: Indeed. Mrs Carnell correctly points out that retail space is in there to be considered, along with shopping hours. The trouble is that Mr Humphries, in his speech, has just said, "However, we will proceed with allowing expansion of retail space". The committee at least should consider whether it is a retail space issue or whether it is just an issue of shopping hours, or a combination of the two. You cannot refer something to a committee like this and at the same time say, "Well, thanks, committee; now we are going to go ahead and do what we like".

The duplicity today is overwhelming. Just a few minutes ago Mr Humphries was standing up and saying, "Look, we will allow a select committee on petrol, but you have to understand that the Government will then, by and large, have its hands tied and will not be able to move while that committee is considering it".

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