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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (18 June) . . Page.. 1769 ..

MR CORBELL: The Greens, Mr Moore and the Liberal Party seem to be suggesting that this will deny people the opportunity to ask a question. It will not. Your opportunity to ask a question remains the same; but, if you would like someone else in this chamber to ask a question on your behalf, if this Opposition or the Liberal Party when they are in opposition one day - and I can assure you that they will be one day - want their leader or another shadow Minister to ask a stream of detailed questions of a Minister in an unbroken sequence, why can that not happen? Is that not another opportunity for effective scrutiny of the Minister?

The Greens seem to be completely misled on this. Michael Moore does, Mr Osborne does and the Liberal Party does. I would urge this Assembly to support this motion. It is a commonsense proposal. It denies no-one the opportunity to have their say. It simply allows an opposition to undertake a different stream of questioning if they believe that is the most effective way of scrutinising the activities of the Executive. I would have thought that Mr Moore, Mr Osborne and the Greens would have wanted that.

Mr Humphries: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I draw to members' attention the fact that only members of the Left faction of the Labor Party are present for this debate.

MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

MR OSBORNE (4.00): Mr Speaker, Mr Humphries stole my thunder a little bit. I just wanted to know where the non-aligned members were and what they thought about this.

Amendment negatived.

MR BERRY (4.01), in reply: Mr Speaker, it is most important to have a look at the hypocrisy of the crossbenches on this issue. Michael Moore can cackle about this, but he knows what I am talking about. He knows that he promised that he would support open and accountable government, and he knows that what he is doing now is preventing Ministers from being more accountable during question time. That is what he knows and that is why he is cackling like a mad hyena.

MR SPEAKER: I do not think they cackle, actually.

MR BERRY: If you have a listen, Mr Moore does. Mr Osborne has taken this view as well, as have the Greens. What has not been mentioned with much strength during the debate is that the Liberal Government opposite is owned by them. It is their government. They were the people who voted for Mrs Carnell and gave her carte blanche to set up a ministry. They would be humiliated if their decision to support that Government was shown to be wrong. It would assist the Opposition in this chamber to that end. That may well be embarrassing, but it is not enough reason for you to dodge the issue and walk away from what is a sensible motion which would make the Government more accountable in accordance with what you promised the electorate when you were elected.

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