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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 11 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3405 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning): I just want to make a very brief comment, if I can. I seek leave to do that, Mr Speaker.

Leave granted.

MR HUMPHRIES: There may well be a lot of truth in what Ms McRae has just said. I do not enter into that. I must admit that I do not have a very strong or clear impression of what things are significant and what are not. I must confess that. However, I take this motion as a shot across the Government's bows. Whatever form the motion comes forward in, we understand what is being required of us, and I hope there will be a responsive attitude on the part of the Government to that shot across the bows. That is the point I want to make.

MR MOORE (4.36), in reply: In closing the debate, Mr Speaker, I thought I should explain a little, particularly for Ms McRae's benefit, just what we mean by "significant use" and what we would expect - - -

Ms McRae: Why do you not put it in an amendment, so that it is there permanently?

MR MOORE: Because the difference is that Mr Humphries and I have what is known as commonsense, which is something you appear to have missed out on. Let me explain it a little more clearly. Ms McRae, on your suggestion that I was God, it would be a significant new use, I believe, if I were to go to Mr Humphries for permission to walk across the lake. Under those circumstances, I think Mr Humphries would indeed have to come back to this Assembly to assess whether or not I would be given permission to walk across the lake. There is no doubt, of course, that such permission would be granted by this Assembly. I am sure that that would be the case; I believe that I would get the numbers. But I do think situations such as you taking your mother for a walk along the lake or a frog race being conducted would not be considered significant by anybody with commonsense. I realise that that may not be so in your definition of such things.

The import of the motion was to do exactly as Mr Humphries pointed out - to put a shot across the bows of the Government, to make it very clear to them, as you said in your speech, Ms McRae, that the consultation process, the path which we are all agreed on and which the Government and particularly the Chief Minister should be particularly embarrassed about, is something she needs to take action on. Mr Speaker, I appreciate the support that members have indicated for this motion.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

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