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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (14 June) . . Page.. 1755 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Whilst it is somewhat a vain hope of mine, I would ask members to support the original substantive motion, because it is the only proposal before you today that ensures the entire woodland area is not developed. That is the outcome we should be pursuing.

Ms Tucker's amendment to Mr Smyth's amendment agreed to.

Mr Smyth's amendment, as amended, agreed to.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

Suspension of standing and temporary orders

Motion (by Ms Tucker ) proposed:

MR CORBELL (4.11): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would simply ask that Ms Tucker outline why she wants this item brought on now. As far as I am aware, Ms Tucker has not raised this matter with the opposition. I am surprised that she is calling it on at this time, without apparently any discussion with us. I am not sure whether she has discussed the matter with other members of this place, but I am not aware of her request to do this. It would seem to me that other members have business on the notice paper already, which they are anticipating dealing with before we deal with any other business.

This item certainly was not raised at the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedure procedural meeting yesterday lunch time. I am somewhat concerned that Ms Tucker seeks to bring this item on without at least flagging it with the committee, let alone talking to other members of this place prior to her moving the motion. It is the first I have heard of it and, quite frankly, for someone who talks about procedure, I can't believe she is doing this. So, unless Ms Tucker can climb to her feet and indicate why she wants to do this now, when she hasn't raised it previously, I don't think the Labor Party can support it.

MR RUGENDYKE (4.13): Ms Tucker did advise me this morning that she would seek leave to introduce this motion even though it is not on the daily program. I have agreed to allow that. I am happy to have this debate. She has liaised with me. That is my point.

MS TUCKER (4.14), in reply: I'm not quite sure, but I thought we communicated quite clearly to members that this was happening today. I thought my office spoke to everyone. If there was a misunderstanding with Mr Berry, I apologise. It is on the notice paper. I did speak to this in admin and procedure, but it was in a different form, which was then ruled out of order by the Speaker. So I changed the motion. We did in admin and procedure agree, Mr Corbell, when you think about it, that my motion would come on after your Watson motion. It was discussed. It was a different motion.

Mr Corbell: It is a completely different motion.

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