Page 675 - Week 03 - Thursday, 15 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Gentleman: Mr Speaker, I draw your attention to the sub judice rule, which we have discussed recently in regard to this. Paragraph (1) of Mr Stefaniak’s motion here goes specifically to the people that are being involved in that court action. I would ask for your ruling on it.
Mr Smyth: Mr Speaker, on the point of order—
MR SPEAKER: I think I can fix this up.
Mr Smyth: You can fix this one up?
MR SPEAKER: Yes. These are documents that became public documents as a result of the coronial inquiry; so sub judice does not apply in relation to those papers because they are documents that were in fact on the web at one stage.
MR STEFANIAK: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for that ruling, and that is quite so. I think at about page 59 or 60 of volume II of the coronial inquest there is a list of dot points which are part of the briefing paper to cabinet. That in itself is reasonably well covered, but of course the rest of the paper is not. But the other documents—any other documents created for or resulting from the briefing—of course are very pertinent to a number of issues that we still do not have answers for, which are being debated in this place and which we have been asking questions about. We still have not been given answers to them.
I can understand the Chief Minister’s tactic in now saying in answer to these questions: “Refer to the transcript. Refer to the report.” That is all very well as far as it goes. But that can only take people so far. He continues to refuse to answer a number of questions which are germane and which are still causing considerable concern to the people of Canberra. These documents, which are referred to in part of the court process but which are not available, we have asked to be tabled. He has refused to do so. They would be of great assistance in terms of, hopefully, finalising this matter and getting some answers to questions that he has not answered. Accordingly, Mr Speaker, I submit that it is very important for this Assembly to ensure these documents are tabled and that we have the debate in relation to that. No doubt the government will probably refuse to, but at least we have a duty to attempt to get these documents; hence the point of this motion and my moving for suspension of standing orders to move it.
MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Business and Economic Development, Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Minister for the Arts) (5.51): The government oppose the suspension of standing orders. Today was an important day, or was meant to be. There is legislation to be debated and passed. We have seen two stunts today by the opposition—two stunts by an opposition that is not prepared to do the work that an opposition is required to do, namely, deliver policy and question the government on policy. We have had not a single question. We are now into the third month of the year, and we have had not a single question on health, not a single question on education. We had a stunt of a motion this morning, the confetti motion of no confidence—an absolute joke, a stunt. We have had two motions of no confidence in two weeks.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .