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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (16 February) . . Page.. 170 ..

MR HIRD (continuing):

Let us go back to the matter before us. There was a great debate last year not only in this place but also in other jurisdictions about the Northern Territory introducing euthanasia. Headmistress Tucker rose to her feet to tell the Federal Government to stay out of it. She said that the Northern Territory was a sovereign government and that the Federal Government should leave it alone. I agreed with that proposal. This time around Ms Tucker does not see it that way. She wants to interfere with a sovereign government in the State of New South Wales.

Ms Tucker: Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I ask Mr Hird to read our motion. We are not instructing the New South Wales Government; we are requesting.

MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order, but you will be able to pick that up later, Ms Tucker.

MR HIRD: Ms Tucker is using up my time. This is one of her ploys. She knows she has the right of reply.

MR SPEAKER: You are using your own now.

MR HIRD: It is true.

Ms Tucker: Mr Speaker, I do need to help Mr Hird understand. I am not trying to take up time. I am trying to help him understand what my motion is. I am just trying to be helpful.

MR HIRD: Seeing Ms Tucker is being so helpful to me, she might be able to instruct me or the Assembly, when she does address this matter in reply, whether she has spoken to the Federal member for Eden-Monaro, Mr Gary Nairn, or indeed the member for Monaro, Mr Peter Webb. Can Ms Tucker inform us whether she has, in due diligence, had the courtesy to take them into her confidence and hear their comments about their electorates' concerns about jobs and the environment or whether she has personally spoken to colleagues in the upper house of the New South Wales Parliament?

Headmistress Tucker should endeavour to better focus her energies on matters concerning the ACT and affairs which affect the electorate which she was elected to represent rather than try to bring about a change in a sovereign government in the State of New South Wales. She should apply herself to matters of more importance in this place and not waste this place's time by trying to usurp a decision not yet made by a government in New South Wales.

Mr Corbell: How can you usurp a decision that has not been made?

Debate interrupted in accordance with standing order 74 and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for a later hour.

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