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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 9 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 2685 ..

MR BERRY: The same rules apply in relation to a direction or a position of this Assembly in relation to this Government's performance in the housing area. If this Assembly has the courage to say to this Government, "We want you to do certain things in relation to public housing, education or any other matter", then the Government risks its future if it ignores the Assembly ruling. What Mr Moore seems to have ignored is that it is in his hands and that every action the Government takes as a result of his inaction is his responsibility. Those are the very issues. Mr Moore makes a great pretence of being a great defender of important social issues, but when it comes to the crunch, especially on things like public housing - - -

Mr De Domenico: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker, for the same reason as before. Whatever Mr Moore's views are, I am sure that Mr Moore is very capable of expressing those views. Could you suggest to Mr Berry that he should relate his comments to the motion at hand?

MR BERRY: I am responding to Mr Moore's comment in the debate, Mr Speaker. I am perfectly entitled to do that.

MR SPEAKER: In debate, not in interjection.

MR BERRY: Mr Moore has it in his hands. Whatever this Government opposite does is his shared responsibility. While ever he stands back and lets them inflict damage on any part of the social infrastructure - be it education, public housing or any other part of the social infrastructure - it is his responsibility. There is no denying it. All the grandstanding in the world about his position in relation to certain issues does not change one thing. To those people who watch the headlines, I say, "Do not believe them. What you have to do is watch the performance. Watch the performance of the Independents in relation to this". This is an issue of great importance to many people in the community, particularly in the inner suburbs where Mr Moore's constituency resides.

Mr Moore: This man was part of a government that cut 80 teachers. The hypocrisy!

MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Berry has the floor.

MR BERRY: For example, I heard no complaint from Mr Moore about the veiled threat to public housing tenants in the inner suburbs when Mrs Carnell was talking - not a murmur. Mrs Carnell gave a clear impression that there were too many people in the inner suburbs. Of course, that is not true. They are perfect suburbs for low-income earners to live in. They are convenient. Transport costs are cheap. What Mrs Carnell seems to be saying is that she would like to move them out. Mrs Carnell mentioned O'Malley, for heaven's sake - we could send them out to O'Malley.

Mr Whitecross: There are no buses out there either.

MR BERRY: There are no buses in O'Malley. Perhaps they might be able to hitch a ride in a good car - a Jaguar or a Mercedes - if they were shifted out to O'Malley. Mrs Carnell does not really understand the needs of public housing tenants. It is perfectly okay to have a high density of public housing in the centre of the city where

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