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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Thursday, 12 February 2004) . . Page.. 283 ..

men’s status in society as a whole. In doing so, I am not isolating women at all. I am one, after all.

I am still surprised that the government has made no valuable contribution or displayed a willingness to present alternative terms of reference. The government constantly carps about the opposition not working with it but when it has a prime opportunity to do something about an extremely important matter, it turns it down out of hand and tosses it out.

Ms Tucker talked about gender. I think she said gender isolated inquiries keep the focus, and I thank her for that. That is exactly what I was saying. I certainly was not putting down women. In fact, I said there has no doubt been a welcome and improved change in the role and rights of women over the last 20 to 30 years. I also said that the proposed inquiry is not about taking anything away from women.

We have a long way to go with women. A lot more needs to be done in respect of the status of women as well. I am just trying to get some equity and balance back into society, for heaven’s sake! We found that this was the case with young women. But now we find that boys’ education is suffering. So we tend to get lopsided. Every now and again there needs to be a check and balance. We need to stop and look at what we are doing and say, “Hang on, yes, we need men, fathers or whatever to come forward.” In this instance, I was asking to have a look at what is happening to fathers.

Women are still disempowered in our society, and I do not disagree that this is the case. But we talk about men and their circumstances half as much as we talk about women. You would have to agree there is much more talk out there about women and their circumstances than there is about men. We do not hear reams of comments about men. I am not saying that to hear about women is wrong. Let us just redress the balance.

I thank Mrs Cross for the little slap on the wrist—or do I? I circulated the motion to your office, like I did with everybody else, and I asked your office for your feedback. I talked to you and to your staff. I talked to you when you were walking down the corridor. I was not just trying to pass the time of day as you flew past me. I was trying to say, “Have you had a chance to look at it?” It was just about reading it, getting back to me and saying what you thought, et cetera.

I am intrigued that Mrs Cross often refers to herself as a new member in this place. She refers to me as having been here twice. I am not too sure who is the new member here. I just wanted people’s input. I asked, “What do you think of the terms of reference? Why don’t you have a look at them and get back to me.” I was expecting their input.

I had decent conversations with staffers. I have no problem with that. I had a good conversation with Mr Hargreaves. As I said, I was waiting for a phone call back from Mrs Cross. You were busy at that time and your staffer said that you would get back to me. That was great. I was waiting for that. Anyway, it does not matter.

Mrs Cross: Three minutes before we have a sitting week.

MRS BURKE: No, it was not three minutes. I think you exaggerate. You protesteth too much, Mrs Cross. I am open, and I have been from the beginning, to any member

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