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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 8 Hansard (29 October) . . Page.. 2443 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

members of the Labor Party made it very clear that they considered that the intensive care unit having a safety valve to send three patients over to the National Capital Private Hospital was privatising the intensive care unit. What absolute nonsense, Mr Speaker. I even had to remind Mr Berry that he, when he was Health Minister, used to purchase public health services from Calvary Hospital, a private organisation. Yet he throws up his hands and says this is terrible; this Government is only interested in privatisation. He wants to dress everything we want to do in the cloak of privatisation. It is simply nonsense.

Mr Speaker, this is not just about depriving the people of Canberra of a say; it is about depriving the Labor Party of another tool of politicisation. That part is fine. I do not mind them going out and giving their views in the strongest way they possibly can. I do object, of course, when those views are based on very poor research or on misrepresenting figures. Aside from that, Mr Speaker, it seems to me that we have a situation where the Labor Party, in particular, wants to use the committee system to continue their campaign. They want to use it as a campaigning tool, and it is that campaigning tool that I believe undermines the system.

Mr Wood: It is Ms Tucker's proposal. Whose proposal is it?

MR MOORE: I think Ms Tucker has an entirely different motive for it. Nevertheless, in supporting this committee approach, that is what we would be doing. We would be politicising the committee system. It is a system that has worked extremely well in this Assembly on many occasions and has been particularly effective at either finding compromises or finding results. There is no compromise on this. We are either going to sell ACTEW or we are not going to sell ACTEW.

Ms Tucker: The whole regulatory framework has to be debated.

MR MOORE: When the regulatory framework comes into question it will be debated in this Assembly as a matter of legislation. For that legislation then to be referred to a committee is another matter that we would consider at the time in that context. This is not about that issue at all. This is about the support that we get. The strength of the support from the Labor Party in particular is about ensuring that they have the opportunity to further politicise the issue. It is the first time that the Labor Party feels that they have an issue upon which they can show some credibility with people.

Mr Kaine raised a series of questions before putting his amendment and some of those questions were about getting information to him. I have said to him personally that I think we as a government should have been much quicker in responding to the questions he asked or in getting the information. At the very least we should have said to him, "Mr Kaine, we are trying to provide this information. Here is the first part of it. We need a bit more detail about getting the other". I certainly invite him to approach me so that I can follow up and ensure that he does get appropriate response and information whenever it is necessary.

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