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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 08 Hansard (Thursday, 5 August 2004) . . Page.. 3556 ..

(b) condemns the Minister for:

(i) his failure to properly consult with the indigenous members of the ACT community … and

(ii) allowing his staff to claim falsely that members of the indigenous community had been consulted …

It is sheer bunkum to pretend we are doing this simply to ensure that some appropriate process is in place. It illustrates the extent to which opposition members are happy to go to engage in cheap politics. That is what this amendment is about. The government has consulted well in relation to this fine piece of legislation. Those in the community who understand heritage and heritage protection issues applaud this bill, which is a benchmark in Australia in relation to heritage protection.

There will always be somebody who will not agree with the final position. There will always be somebody who, in some instances, will disagree just for the sake of disagreeing. There will always be instances in relation to almost all consultation where somebody will take a contrary position for the sake of taking a contrary position. No matter what commitments are made or what concessions are agreed to they will still not be satisfied and they will still never agree. That is the case in relation to this legislation. This fine piece of legislation deserves to be passed.

Question put:

That Mrs Dunne’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

There being confusion concerning the numbers reported, the Assembly, in accordance with standing order 165, proceeded to another vote.

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Question put:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

The Assembly voted—

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