Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 12 Hansard (24 November) . . Page.. 3629 ..
MS CARNELL (continuing):
exactly what he has done. It is a 670-page report, one that I do not think anybody would doubt has taken a huge amount of time and effort. I would suspect that not one person in this Assembly would agree with every part of the report. But the fact is that an independent arbiter has looked at all of the information and come up with a report - a report that the Government accepts, both the bits of it that we would have written differently if it had been us and all of the recommendations.
But what did those opposite and Mr Kaine and Ms Tucker do after having this report for half an hour or an hour? They were out there saying that they were going to run a no-confidence motion or support a no-confidence motion. That tends to indicate exactly what we have always believed, that is, that Labor has had this motion on their books for two years. It really did not matter what the coroner's report was going to say. The trigger for the no-confidence motion was the release of the report. "When the report is released, we are going to run a no-confidence motion; it really does not matter what it says".
Mr Stanhope's motion today has had nothing to do with ensuring that an event like this will not occur again in the ACT. In his speech and, I would have to say, the speeches of all of the others opposite, none of them have looked at what we can do to address the issues. It has just been about securing a political scalp at any cost, at any amount of personal hurt that those opposite can inflict on people such as the Bender family. I think that is absolutely unacceptable.
The motion has also been about inflicting maximum personal and political damage upon me. Politics is a difficult game - there is no doubt about that - but to use the death of a child in this way is absolutely beyond belief. Much as I am not surprised at one or two of those opposite using it, I have to say that I am absolutely amazed that others, such as Mr Wood, would take this approach.
Mr Wood: We sit here and say nothing!
Mr Stanhope: That is disgusting.
MS CARNELL: When I view the demolition, I see it as a tragedy that we must do everything in our power to learn from and improve our management of projects and tasks in the future.
Mr Wood: Look at yourself.
MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, nobody else interjected.
MR SPEAKER: No. I have said before that I want this debate to be heard in silence, please. Mr Stanhope, you will have the opportunity to respond in due course and I trust that you will be given the same courtesy of silence as we are asking for Mrs Carnell.
MS CARNELL:
Thank you. Mr Speaker, today I will focus on the facts and on what actually happened. These events show that while mistakes were made - nobody doubts that - and that we can put in place much better safeguards, and we are, there was nothing that I or any member of my Government was aware of at the time that could have
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .