Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3647 ..
MR WOOD: I acknowledge that there is an issue there. There is no question about that; there is an issue. Mind you, the government thinks that it can pass over budgetary matters, executive matters, to the legislature; so where do you stand on this? You support that. There has been over the years a blurring between the legislature and the executive. Do not be so pious about it. You quoted your planned legislation of some little time ago, but think back a little further to the time when, together with the Liberals, you were going to get into the budget and make very significant changes to it. I remember; I was education minister at the time. How do you stand on that? Was that not a very significant intrusion, no less significant than this, of the legislature into the executive?
Mr Moore: Yes, and it was a mistake, you are right.
MR WOOD: It was a mistake, but it went ahead. The one difference was that the Labor Party at the time, under Rosemary Follett, recognised that we could fight it, that we could argue on the ground of principles and that we could do other things, but it was going to happen, so she said, "Let's do it." That is what you have done on this occasion, except that you were much less willing to do so and you had to be dragged kicking and screaming to do it. So, Mr Moore, do not stand up today and try to lecture others in this Assembly about this issue, because you are no different. What you want to do is to be able to play on one playing field of your decision and deny to others the rules that you want to operate under. That simply will not wash.
Mr Moore has got it in his head - he is fixated on it - that there is one advocacy group out there that is stirring up all this trouble. That is his fixation, at least I think it is. I think that he is genuinely of that belief. That is not the case; it is simply not the case.
Mr Moore: We will see.
MR WOOD: What did you say? "We will see." I am now much more concerned, like Ms Tucker, about the inclusion of advocacy services into the terms of reference.
Mr Moore: No, you are misinterpreting me. We will see how widespread the problem is; that is what I was saying.
MR WOOD: You had me worried. I can tell you that I have been approached over a long period, but most particularly in the last few months, by a very large number of parents. Indeed, the advocacy group you have referred to in conversation with me is not, in my view, a big player in this at all; it is not. Mr Moore mentioned the advocacy group and one parent who were stirring for this inquiry. I had never met that parent. I happened to see her out here one day after a motion had been moved in the Assembly.
Mr Moore: Don't worry, Bill, I won't have a private conversation with you again.
MR WOOD
: I think that is a very good idea, Mr Moore. I do not argue about that at all, because you do not know how to handle those things. Let us be clear: this inquiry is being sought by a very broad range of people in the community. The government has acted, finally. I have some anxieties about the way it has done so. It has appointed a respected judicial figure who is not familiar with the territory, as against the legal
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .