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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2356 ..

MR BERRY (6.15): Mr Speaker, Labor will be supporting this amendment. Mrs Carnell made great play on the issue of being consistent. Well, this never ever applied in previous models in the ACT and I cannot see any reason why the provision which is being removed by this amendment should not be removed.

Mr Humphries: It has in other legislation.

MR BERRY: Mr Speaker, Mr Humphries pipes up, "It has in other legislation". That is my point. We are being consistent in relation to this matter because it has never applied in relation to Health, and there is no argument that it should. We have a situation here where there could be changes in title to land that may be vested in the service. There could be secret deals with other interests which might impact on the community and the Health and Community Care Service and the services that it provides to the community. There is no reason for this to be kept secret.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (6.16): Mr Speaker, clearly this amendment is going to pass. I think that members on the crossbenches might be letting off the Labor Party a little bit lightly on this subject. Mr Berry has explained, in extremely scant detail, why he sees that the policy that he pursued in office, of protecting joint ventures from that kind of exposure - - -

Mr Berry: We do not want there to be any, you see, unless they are properly detailed in this house.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, if I can continue my remarks, Mr Berry in office - that is, the Government of which he was part - did create protection for joint ventures in these circumstances in other legislation. There is no doubt about that. I can produce examples of where that has happened. It is in other legislation. In fact, it has always been in Territory legislation. I am not sure that Mr Moore has moved amendments of this kind to previous legislation that has contained that in the past.

Mr Moore: Yes, I have tried in the past but gave up after failing.

MR HUMPHRIES: Okay, I take Mr Moore's word for that. Mr Moore has supported that position in the past, but Mr Berry has always opposed it, as have members of the Liberal Party. What is different now?

Mr Berry: It has never been in health legislation.

MR HUMPHRIES: I do not know whether it has been in health legislation in the past, but why is a joint venture relating to a health service any different from a joint venture relating to, say, an educational service, or a service in relation to land, or a service for provision of other services such as those in Urban Services? Why they should be different I do not know.

Mr Berry: Do you remember the TAB and you people screeching for it?

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes. Well, why should it be different in a TAB? Why should not a joint venture in the TAB - - -

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