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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 8 Hansard (29 October) . . Page.. 2429 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

We have seen a debate in which, perhaps necessarily, parties in this place have very clearly stated their position on this issue with crystal clarity. The Liberal Party and the Government in this place have stated, with absolute clarity, that it believes there ought to be a privatisation of ACTEW, or at least the electricity arm of ACTEW, and a concession for the water arm of ACTEW by approximately the middle of next year. The Labor Party has stated with equal clarity and certainty that it does not believe that that should take place. Ms Tucker, I think, has aligned herself with the view of the Labor Party.

To the best of my knowledge there are only three members of this Assembly who have not stated a position on this issue. They are Mr Kaine, Mr Rugendyke and Mr Osborne. Maybe an inquiry consisting of those three people would be a productive way of spending some Assembly time, but that is not what is proposed by this motion.

Mr Wood: Don't you have any confidence in your figures?

MR HUMPHRIES: I have plenty of confidence in my figures. What I do not have, Mr Speaker, is confidence in members to sit down and use a committee objectively to sift the facts. What I expect to be the case is for an Assembly inquiry of this kind to be an opportunity for opponents of this proposal - - -

Mr Berry: You do not want the facts to come out. That is your problem.

MR SPEAKER: Order, please! Mr Humphries deserves to be heard in silence, as other members were.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, we would see an Assembly inquiry which would be used as a massive point-scoring exercise by, in particular, the Opposition. It would be an opportunity to sift and find incriminating so-called gaps in the evidence and incriminating slip-ups by witnesses before the committee. It would be an opportunity to find anything at all that would contribute to the quite outrageous campaign of misinformation which has already begun in this community over the question of the sale of ACTEW.

To suggest, as Ms Tucker does, that this would be an opportunity to assess the facts may be true, on her view about this. I do not asperse her motivation in this, I do not know enough about it; but I have no hesitation in saying it would be used by the Labor Party as an opportunity to throw up every piece of misinformation and disinformation that could be found. Why do I say that, Mr Speaker? Because it has already occurred in this debate. It has already occurred in this debate several times. The most recent and the most egregious example was what happened in this place yesterday. Mr Corbell's use of information which was untrue created a misleading impression which - - -

Mr Wood: You did not have a good day yesterday. I would not bring yesterday up. You got done over yesterday on all sorts of things.

MR SPEAKER: Order, please! There is far too much conversation. Somebody else will be having a bad day today if they are not careful.

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