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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Tuesday, 10 February 2004) . . Page.. 11 ..

enough to allow us at least to hear what other people are saying and to allow our views to be challenged. That is what I have always felt we have to be able to do in the committee process.

That does often happen and we get very interesting results from that process when people are open-minded. I remember on the select committee that we ran on housing, Mr Wood supported recommendations that were not supported by the Labor Party at the time. He knew he had the freedom to do that within the committee process. It did not mean that that was a terrible compromise and it was a big shame or embarrassment for Labor at the time: it meant that Mr Wood had participated in that inquiry as an independent person and did come to the conclusions that he came to. His party then had the job of listening to what he said, looking at what the committee said, and coming up with its own conclusions. That is the strength of the committee system.

What we have ended up with here is a situation where, as I said, Mrs Dunne has not spoken. She may want to speak now, which might help inform my vote, but at this point in time I would have to say that we probably need to have a privileges inquiry. If Mrs Dunne were to speak about her views and whether she felt it was clearly a contempt, and she was prepared to acknowledge that, then there is the potential for the Assembly to deal with it without going through that process. However, I do think it is a serious issue and I do think that, at this point, it looks as though there could have been interference with the work of the committee.

MRS DUNNE (11.03): I deliberately held back to speak, Mr Speaker, so I would not take up the time of the Assembly by seeking leave to speak again if it became necessary. As members will note, there is a motion scheduled for later in the day in relation to the Planning and Environment Committee. That motion is to allow me to stand aside from the inquiry of the Planning and Environment Committee into the Belconnen markets and the petition in relation to the Belconnen markets. The motion reads:

That Mrs Dunne be discharged from attending the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment for that Committee’s consideration of the inquiry into the building of an Aldi supermarket next to the Belconnen Markets.

I did that when, after I returned from leave, it was raised with me that the brochure that is the subject of debate was the cause of some concern to a member. I think I need to go back a bit: this brochure was circulated on the last weekend in November at the Belconnen markets, when I was about my usual constituency activity on Saturday mornings, which is visiting shopping centres. It happened that we were scheduled to be at the Belconnen markets.

I thought, on the day before I was going to the Belconnen markets, that as I was going to the markets and that, as this was a matter of particular interest to the people who shop there, I should provide some information to inform people of what was happening, because there had not been very much media coverage of the fact that there was a committee inquiry. Although the committee had written to the stall holders and the owners of the building, and to stall holders and shopkeepers in surrounding areas, 3,000-odd people had signed petitions in relation to the building of an Aldi at the Belconnen markets. I thought that this would be a small attempt to communicate with

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