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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3327 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

Mrs Carnell again treated this Assembly with contempt in her treatise on the issue in front of us. Mr Speaker, listen to what Mrs Carnell said in supposedly not opposing and not supporting the application for the common rule. Mr Moore should listen to this, unless he wants this Chief Minister to be allowed to deliberately - - -

MR SPEAKER: Mr Berry, we all have to listen to this, so proceed.

MR BERRY: If he wants to save this Chief Minister's bacon again, he should do it in the full knowledge of the fact that he has allowed the Chief Minister to mislead the Assembly, as it seems he wishes to do.

Mr Osborne, on the other hand, has an interesting version of history. Mr Osborne says, "I believe that if a Minister has misled the Assembly there should be a motion of no confidence". This Minister has been censured for misleading before, Mr Osborne. It is not something that does not have any history in this place. I know that neither Mr Osborne nor Mr Moore would support a motion of no confidence. They do not mind being misled by the Liberal Chief Minister. They think it is okay. They do not like being led by the nose to that decision. They have to be dragged by the nose to that decision when it comes to this Liberal Chief Minister.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Berry, I remind you about relevance and wasting the time of the Assembly.

MR BERRY: Mr Speaker, this is entirely relevant. It is addressing the way that people should vote in relation to a very important motion, which is before this chamber, about the Chief Minister misleading it. That is a contempt of the Assembly.

This is Mrs Carnell supposedly not opposing or agreeing:

Many of the community service organisations are reliant upon ACT Government budgetary assistance to provide part or all of their ongoing funds. Application of common rule may threaten the viability of these community organisations ...

Mr Speaker, that is opposing. It is in the form prescribed for objecting to an application. The clear option available for the Chief Minister was an application for a common rule. She could have used one of those schedules. She will have to use one of them now if she wishes to pursue the Assembly's decision in relation to the matter. It will be interesting to see whether she tears up the old form and puts in a new one.

This Chief Minister came in here yesterday and deliberately misled us. She held this Assembly in contempt by pretending that she had never opposed the common rule application for the social and community services award. Mr Kaine misled this Assembly by saying that he did not oppose the implementation of a common rule for the social and community services award. They thought we would never find out. He said:

But let me make it quite clear that the Government does not oppose the implementation of a common rule for the social and community services award.

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