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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 8 Hansard (25 August) . . Page.. 2371 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

does not stop us from doing that. There are principles about this. Members might care to consider those principles. They are no less relevant or more relevant today than they will be next week.

If members feel inclined to debate a matter which is also being pursued in the Industrial Relations Commission, which is a decision we can make either today or next week - it has no bearing on the timing of the thing - then we can make that decision and go forward and have the debate. If we regard it as improper to have a debate on a matter which is sub judice, then we should not have the debate today either, any more than we should have it next week, Mr Speaker.

MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, I seek leave to make a statement.

Leave granted.

MR CORBELL: The Government has not given this Assembly any reason why the fact that this matter is before the commission affects their ability to deal with the legislation today. I have not heard any government MLA stand up in this place and say, "Because the matter is in the commission we are unable to deal with it for X, Y or Z reason". They have not given us any reason at all. Why are they proposing today to delay this matter? It is an absurd proposition. It is a ruse. It is a deliberate attempt to indefinitely delay the legislation passing through this place. They have not given us any reason why putting it in the commission affects their ability to deal with it on the floor of this place. Until they do that, we should not be supporting the adjournment today.

Mr Humphries made some comments about other delays in this place on an earlier day. I draw it to your attention, Mr Speaker, that perhaps all does not lie at the feet of non-Executive members in this place. When the Government issued its draft program last week, it had down for debate yesterday an amendment to the Land (Planning and Environment) Act. That amendment was to change the level of betterment from 75 to 50.

It was not until the Labor Party drew the attention of the Government to the fact that that Bill could not be debated because the Assembly had already made a decision on that matter that they rescheduled their business, bringing on the Environment Protection (Amendment) Bill. That was not done until early this week.

Then, obviously, there were problems with members not expecting that Bill to be debated on the Tuesday but quite legitimately, because it was on the Government's draft program, expecting it on Thursday. If the Government cannot manage its own business, that makes it very difficult for the rest of the Assembly to respond.

The Government has given no legitimate or valid reason why they are unable to deal with the Bill today simply because the matter is before the commission. Explain to us why you are unable to deal with this Bill today because the matter is in the commission. Do not just say it is in the commission. Give us a reason.

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