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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (26 August) . . Page.. 2402 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

"We seek it"; not the Federal Government will do it. This is not the Federal Government telling us, the ACT Government, what it is proposing to do. This is the ACT Government seeking to put in place a process by which they can change the land tenure system in the ACT, despite the fact that at every step along the way every other party and Independent in this Assembly, apart from the Liberal Party, has said no.

The overwhelming majority of people in the ACT represented by the Labor Party, the Greens and the Independents in this Assembly have said, "No, we are not prepared to see the system of land tenure changed", and the Minister had given a commitment in the Assembly that they would not seek to have that system changed. They have just sought it. There is the letter. You sought it from the Federal Government. It is that simple.

Mr Humphries: You had that letter six months ago.

MR CORBELL: You sought it. You sought the change, and that is why we believe you are no longer appropriate to manage the system of land tenure in the ACT.

Mr Speaker, I would like to move on to another matter that has been raised in this debate, and that is the so-called currency of want-of-confidence motions. It has been suggested that these are a dime a dozen. The only things that are a dime a dozen are the censure motions like the one that Ms Horodny has moved. There has been only one other want-of-confidence motion in the life of this Assembly, and you would be surprised to see whom it was moved by. It was moved by the ACT Greens and it was a motion of want of confidence in the Chief Minister as Minister for Health. So, before others go out of this place and say the Labor Party is abusing what is a very severe sanction, I ask them to think about that. There has been only one other want-of-confidence motion. It was not moved by the Opposition; it was moved by the Greens. We do not take this step lightly, and we have outlined why we do not take this step lightly.

Mr Speaker, I would like to draw now on that previous want-of-confidence motion moved by Ms Tucker. It was moved on 19 November last year and in the debate Ms Tucker said, quite clearly, that she believes it is appropriate to move a motion of want of confidence when the system is not working, when the Government's ability to manage the processes of government, in the relevant portfolio, is falling down. That is exactly what we are doing today. We are saying today that this Government works deliberately to undermine the will of the Assembly at every step.

This Minister has worked in conjunction with his Federal counterparts to put in place a system of perpetual leasehold in the ACT. He may play around with niceties about words. He may hide behind little verbal arguments that he may be able to construct, as I am sure he will, being a lawyer; but it is quite clear what he has endeavoured to do. I know it was the Chief Minister who wrote to the Minister for Territories. But he is the Minister responsible; it is his portfolio. I find it difficult to believe that he was not aware of this letter. I find it difficult to believe that he was not aware that his Government had made the decision, presumably at Cabinet level, to seek the support of the Federal Government to amend the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act to remove the 99-year restriction on the majority of leases in the Territory.

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