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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2565 ..

MR BERRY: I will tell you how the salary base for the Independents was set. Mr Moore made it clear that the Labor Party would not get its legislative program through unless he had more people to read the documents.

Mr Moore: That is not quite true, Wayne.

MR BERRY: And it was about getting legislation through. Do you know what the Greens said in the first meeting we had with them after the last election? They said, "How much are you going to give us for our staff? We want the same as Michael Moore, each". Let us not forget about Michael Moore and the change between Independent and party. He changed to a party at election time because it suited him and back to an Independent because it changed the salary allocation. You were an Independent when you came back into the chamber. That was not illegal; but those are the facts of the matter. (Further extension of time granted) It was never about policies; it was always about salary allocations.

Mr Speaker, this motion by the Greens is about splitting up the spoils for themselves and weakening the major political parties. It is political and personal - there is no doubt about it - and it should be dumped without ceremony. It is not about changing the style of government; it is about increasing their own power and influence in this place.

MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, I raise a point under standing order 47. Mr Berry suggested that I had told Labor that its legislative program would not go through unless I had more staff. It is not quite accurate. My exact representations to Ms Follett were that, because I was answering my own phone all the time, I did not have enough time to do things as quickly as she would like and that that would probably continue and get worse unless I had adequate staff to do the tasks - which is not completely different from what Wayne said, but a slight variation. That is a matter about which I have no shame, Mr Speaker, but I do want the record to be accurate.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (5.29): Mr Speaker, when the Greens first outlined their plans to abolish the position of Leader of the Opposition, like that of most people on this side, my first thought was, "That is interesting. There might be certain benefits here". But after about 30 seconds, I think - - -

Mr Kaine: Bear in mind that the Chief Minister is next.

MRS CARNELL: Yes. After that, I have to say that I was fairly sceptical about their proposal. I said back then - it was a while ago now - and I will say it again now, that, if all they are doing with this motion is having a straight political go at Mr Berry now or Mr Whitecross, who was the Leader of the Opposition at that time, then the Government would not be interested in the motion. Getting rid of the position in its own right will not, in our view, contribute to achieving the kinds of reforms that would improve the way the Assembly and our system of government operate. We have heard quite a lot about systems of government in this debate this afternoon; but no-one, not even Ms Tucker, has explained to us how this motion was going to achieve any of those things.

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