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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 267 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

I simply have not seen. But there is no doubt about it; it is unacceptable mistreatment of a volunteer representative who gave up a great deal of her time for the public good. That is what it is about. It is an unacceptable attempt to suppress public debate, which contradicts the Liberals' supposed open government system.

Mrs Carnell: Nobody is suppressing any debate.

MR MOORE: It is.

Mrs Carnell: It has created debate.

Mr Humphries: Have we suppressed debate, Michael?

MR MOORE: Yes, we have created debate, but it was not you who created debate. It was Mr De Domenico. I just point out that there still has not been any farewell speech about Mr De Domenico. The Government has let him go as well. He has been given the flick and the kick, and he has gone. There have been no nice comments. Be warned, Mr Kaine. There were no nice comments for Mr De Domenico when he left. They were glad to see him go. He caused just a bit too much trouble. Oh, Mr De Domenico caused too much trouble. Another person causing too much trouble for the Government had to go. I must say that it would appear that Mr De Domenico actually resigned, but we still have not heard the nice words, and one is wondering whether it will ever happen. You have only a short time.

Mr Osborne: There is the adjournment debate this afternoon.

MR MOORE: Mr Osborne, of course, will raise it in the adjournment debate, and I may well say some nice things about my colleague Mr De Domenico even though we did have some quite significant political differences. I will have to think hard.

What we see here - on a number of occasions I have warned this Government about this - is a sign of increasing arrogance. Indeed, Mr Kaine, before he was elevated to the ministry, also warned the Government that this was a problem. I think Mr Kaine said something about having to take more notice of the community. I am sure that with him in the Cabinet - far be it from me to try to put a wedge into the Cabinet - we will be seeing a great deal more thought given to how to avoid being a particularly arrogant government.

With this increasing arrogance there is a fear of failure. When people are being critical, instead of just saying, "Okay, what is this criticism about? How are we going to handle it?", they are saying, "No, we are going to attack the person". Indeed, that is the result that we have here - a derisive dismissal. I think this is demonstrated nowhere more clearly than in the letter referred to in the article in, I think, Saturday's Canberra Times - many of you have read it - where Mrs Carnell, on the one hand, apologises because there is a legal letter that says an apology would be acceptable; but then she came into this chamber on Tuesday and launched into an incredible personal attack in response to a question. That is what got the debate restarted. In response to a question you reiterated all those things that, effectively, you had apologised for. This I find quite - - -

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