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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3325 ..

MR BERRY: You just told us that you had.

Mrs Carnell: No, I have not. We have not put in our submission yet.

MR BERRY: You just told us that that is still your position. My amendment is being circulated. I apologise to members for not having it ready for them to peruse while I speak, though it is only a few words and I am sure that they will be able to get across it fairly quickly.

During the debate on the motion of censure I moved, Mrs Carnell acknowledged that a motion was moved in this Assembly yesterday which urged the Government to take a particular position in relation to the SACS award, that is, the common rule application which is before the commission. She said in the course of her speech, "But the Government's position still is that we neither support nor oppose the application". That is clearly in contempt of a decision which was taken just yesterday. That sort of contemptible position deserves censure as well. You get two birds with one stone here. The Chief Minister has said, "I will not take any notice of your motion".

Mrs Carnell: I did not say that.

MR BERRY: You said very clearly, within earshot of all of us, "The Government's position still is that we will neither support nor oppose". That is what the Government's position still is. The Government is not saying, "We have changed our minds since the motion yesterday". You did not say, "We have changed our minds since yesterday's motion because the Assembly has made a decision, and we will support that decision in the Industrial Relations Commission. Everybody can relax". That is not what you said, Chief Minister. You clearly said to us, "The Assembly made a decision yesterday, and we do not care. Our position still is that we neither support nor oppose the application". If for no other reason, I urge members to support my amendment relating to the deliberate contempt of the Assembly which has been displayed by the Chief Minister.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (4.13): Let me very quickly say what I was going to say before Mr Berry raised that issue. Of course the Government's submission to the Industrial Relations Commission in October will reflect the Assembly's direction. That goes without saying. That does not mean that the views of the Government have changed. It means that our position is quite clear and always has been. Our submission will reflect what the Assembly directs, but personally my position is the same as it was yesterday.

MR OSBORNE (4.14): I will be very brief, Mr Speaker. I will not be supporting the censure motion - not because there is no weight in the argument of Mr Berry's, but because I feel that, if a Minister has misled the Assembly, then there should be a no-confidence motion. If Mr Berry wants to convince us that the Minister has misled, then let us have a no-confidence motion, not a censure motion. If you are confident that she has misled, Mr Berry, then put up a no-confidence motion and not a censure motion. My understanding of the history of this Assembly is that, if a Minister misleads, then there is a no-confidence motion, as you are painfully aware, Mr Berry.

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