Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 1 Hansard (15 February) . . Page.. 232 ..
MR BERRY (continuing):
The drip feeding of pork in the last week or so has been picked up by experienced commentators and exposed for what it is. That will continue to be the case while ever the government continues with this process of phoney consultation. Everybody knows that it is phoney. Everybody knows that it is a sham. Everybody knows that it makes no difference to the performance of this government.
The government's performance is hopeless. It brings to mind the contribution to the debate made earlier when the government's triumph was described as "tri" and "umph". I do not think the consultation process has any oomph at all, and neither does the community. If Ms Burke wants to try to convince a few people by ringing them from a public phone, she will need a lot of money before she finds anybody who believes the government is sincere about this. She will be making a lot of phone calls, and it will take her a long time, unless she finds people who have a Liberal Party ticket burning in their pocket. They are the only people who will go along with this. She will not find anybody else.
I go back to Mr Moore's contribution to the debate. He said, "We cannot see ...." Mr Moore, open your eyes. The way is clear. If you are an efficient and competent executive, it is easy to conduct consultation directly with the community. The problem is that you are just not up to it and you have embarked on a propagandising campaign of disinformation in the community about the consultation process. It is a sham.
MS TUCKER: I seek leave to speak.
Leave granted.
MS TUCKER: I wish to clarify the timing. Mr Humphries did insist that it was the 19th, but my recollection was correct. The original letter from Mr Humphries said that the portfolio standing committees will need to report to the Assembly by 21 March. So Mr Humphries has given us two more days.
So people are clear about the timeframe we are talking about, this is Thursday, the 15th. We now have the draft budget. We have the opportunity next week to put out advertisements inviting people in the community to consider the draft budget and put in submissions. We then have two sitting weeks. That is not a lot of time for community organisations to get submissions together, but they would pretty well have to get it done in those two weeks. Then with the week starting 12 March plus now another four days, we would have two weeks to hear the community, have a deliberative committee session and come up with a report. Mr Hird and Mrs Burke will have to be on all those committees. All those committees will have to sit at the same time. In addition, there are all the other commitments that members have in this place. I do not believe it is an appropriate timeframe at all.
Mr Humphries: So why aren't you moving to amend the timeframe?
MS
TUCKER: Mr Humphries asks why I do not move to amend the timeframe. The government has said it is impossible. I have said to Mr Humphries-and Mr Moore said it-that I am listening to what he is saying. It is true that the Greens have worked with this proposal. I find this a really difficult situation. We were interested in it. I will not say
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .