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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 7 Hansard (30 June) . . Page.. 1812 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

It is not surprising that we have seen such a shift in the views of Mr Stanhope because Mr Stanhope has been talking for some weeks about a no-confidence motion in the Chief Minister. It is curious that he now chooses to leave, Mr Speaker. These events, we are told, are serious. Courtesy is extended to all others, but Mr Stanhope just wanders off. He wanders off when he is confronted by the lack of intent and by the lack of evidence.

Mr Speaker, what is today about? Well, it is like being the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland. Mr Stanhope has been saying, "Sentence first; we will get a verdict afterwards". That is what today's motion is all about. It is about sentencing the Chief Minister. It is about passing judgment on the Government before all the information and all the options are available. Mr Stanhope knows that the Auditor-General is in the process of considering this matter, yet he is determined to press on with his flawed motion.

What does this say about Mr Stanhope's belief in civil liberties? What does it say about his claim that there is a new Labor Party? It says that Mr Stanhope clearly believes in a fair, open approach, except, of course, where it involves the Liberal Government. Civil liberties are fine, according to Mr Stanhope, as long as he is not fighting for government. Mr Stanhope's position now appears to be that when Labor is fighting for government all the rules simply go out the window. Goodbye decency; goodbye waiting for all the evidence; goodbye civil libertarian values; hello kangaroo court; hello star chamber, as long as Labor can get into government.

Mr Stanhope revealed his motives at the Labor Party conference on the weekend. This is not about good government; this is not about the sanctity of the law. This is simply about damaging the Government and damaging the Chief Minister. (Extension of time granted) It is fascinating that after five years in the wilderness and after four Leaders of the Opposition the Labor Party still has a belief that it is the natural party for government, both in the ACT and elsewhere, and they cannot still quite define how the electorate got it so wrong.

Mr Speaker, it was curious that Mr Stanhope raised the example of the Cayman Islands. He said the management chart for managing Bruce is somewhat like a chart of the Cayman Islands. When the first Carnell Government came to office in 1995 it took them some two years and a group of law firms to work out how Harcourt Hill works. There is the chart. They are all in there. If Bruce looks like the Cayman Islands then the chart of management for Harcourt Hill looks like the entire West Indies. You can see quite clearly the Bahamas. There is the Greater Antilles. There is the Netherlands Antilles. The Cayman Islands are there. There is a spot for Jamaica. There is even a spot for Cuba because it is so convoluted. It is not understandable, Mr Speaker, and I table that. I think it would be in the interests of all members to look at it. I might table the map of the Cayman Islands so that those opposite understand where the Cayman Islands fit in relation to the whole of the West Indies. They are the masters of the convoluted position. They are the masters who will hide things. What we have done here has been quite open the whole time.

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