Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 6 Hansard (25 May) . . Page.. 1846 ..
MR CORBELL (continuing):
Mr Rugendyke, Mr Hird and I are well aware of the pressure on the committee in relation to this inquiry and the very high level of public interest. I do not believe it is in Mr Gower's best interests or Mr Smyth's best interests that this matter is considered back in that hot-house atmosphere. We need a select committee which can deal with this matter appropriately and professionally; one which brings to bear the knowledge and the experience of members who have strong understandings of parliamentary practice and the rules of privilege and who are not directly involved in any way with the inquiry that is being conducted by the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services. That is what I am asking members to do today. It is a straightforward proposition. The evidence from Mr Gower is stark and explicit. It raises serious questions about why he gave that evidence, and I urge members to support the motion.
Question put:
That the amendment (Mr Humphries' ) be agreed to.
The Assembly voted-
Ayes, 8 Noes, 8 Ms Carnell Mr Berry Mr Cornwell Mr Corbell Mr Hird Mr Hargreaves Mr Humphries Mr Kaine Mr Moore Mr Quinlan Mr Rugendyke Mr Stanhope Mr Smyth Ms Tucker Mr Stefaniak Mr WoodQuestion so resolved in the negative, in accordance with standing order 162.
Question put:
That the motion (Mr Corbell's ) be agreed to.
The Assembly voted-
Ayes, 9 Noes, 7 Mr Berry Ms Carnell Mr Corbell Mr Cornwell Mr Hargreaves Mr Hird Mr Kaine Mr Humphries Mr Quinlan Mr Moore Mr Rugendyke Mr Smyth Mr Stanhope Mr Stefaniak Ms Tucker Mr WoodQuestion so resolved in the affirmative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .