Page 3883 - Week 12 - Thursday, 23 November 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Hargreaves: I can tell by the look on your face it is a waste of my time.
MADAM TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Hargreaves, that really is exceedingly disorderly.
MR SMYTH: And with failure comes censure, because in this he has betrayed the Chief Minister and the policy and the principles they set out in the election, and for that reason the minister should be censured. (Time expired.)
MR PRATT (Brindabella) (4.08): The minister is being censured today because of his disgraceful performance that we have seen here today, on the back of a very, shoddy and sham-packed plan—
Members interjecting—
MR PRATT: Yes, indeed; the way that he has managed this whole exercise. Again, for the record I would like to note that the minister has left the chamber; so again during a motion of censure he has gone and clearly does not want to face the music.
The minister has today shown in this place, by gagging the debate this morning and the language that he used in trying to justify his decision to close the library, just how he had trampled over the sensibilities and the rights of the Griffith community. It is because of that attitude as well that the opposition has determined that a censure motion had to be moved. So it is for a combination of examples of arrogance: the failure to consult, the disdain about even thinking about consulting, and the way that he ridiculed the letters that he had received—and he did that here in this place in front of visitors in the gallery. All of these reasons justify this minister being censured for his total approach to this particular issue.
I want to pick up a couple of points that he had made today. We have asked about the terms of reference and, indeed, the community had sought to make FOI applications. Where were the terms of reference for the government’s review of the library service and for their decision making about Griffith library in particular? Where were the terms of reference? The terms of reference should be made public.
Why does the minister say that confidentiality issues impeded the publication of the terms of reference? Surely, if there had been commercial-in-confidence issues in any terms of reference underpinning an investigation or a review of the library services, those elements could have been blacked out. If the minister had publicised his terms of reference, he might have brought the community along with him. But the mere fact that he did not publicise those terms of reference and did not want to talk about them again underlines the minister’s arrogant approach to managing this particular issue.
When a government is going to make a monumental decision which will impact severely on the community, as has happened with the Griffith library, the government has a duty to consult well before the decision is taken, to promulgate the terms of reference well in advance and to publicise any reports well before a decision is taken. So if there is a report on the review which may form the basis of a government
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .