Page 2170 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 28 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Stanhope: A daytime branch of the Liberal Party.
MR STEFANIAK: Thank you very much: it is a daytime branch of the Liberal Party. Here we go again. I do not know whether it was you, Chief Minister, or another of your ministers who asked whether ACT Shelter was a daytime branch of the Greens. Again, you denigrate, abuse, a group with whom you do not agree.
Seriously, that is not the way an executive should operate. We know you are a majority government but that does not mean that the normal standards should go out the window. It means that you are able to pass whatever legislation you want. It means you are able to pass this budget. It means your programs are going to get through. But there are—and there have been—many majority governments in Australia. But I have not heard from them the needless abuse—whether in the spur of the moment; whether you have got out on the wrong side of bed—that some of these groups are subjected to.
If that had occurred during the nineties—and probably under any government—I doubt it very much that the minister concerned would have survived. If it had happened under the Liberal government, I imagine Ms Tucker would have been the first one moving no-confidence motions—as would you, Mr Stanhope, or you, Mr Corbell. You need to lift your game. It does not put you and anyone here in a particularly good light. When you engage in name-calling it just does not help whatsoever. In fact, you are breaching your own ministerial code of conduct, which states that:
Ministers will act with respect towards the institution of the Legislative Assembly, and are to ensure that their conduct, whether in a personal or official capacity, does not bring the Assembly into disrepute, or damage public confidence in the system of government.
It goes on to say:
All Ministers are to recognise the importance of full and true disclosure and accountability to the Parliament. And under the ACT’s Westminster-style system, the Executive Government of the ACT is answerable to the Legislative Assembly and, through it, to the people.
You talk about policy, Mr Stanhope. It mentions something on page 25 in relation to your per cent for art scheme, which my colleague Mr Mulcahy has already announced. There is one for starters; do not come back at me. The opposition makes a number of recommendations in its dissenting report.
Mr Stanhope: What was that recommendation?
MR STEFANIAK: Read it on page 25. You have been pretty dismissive of it; have a read. Have a read of his media releases too. Mr Hargreaves’s behaviour was not marvellous in 2006 and it certainly did not get any better this year. At best it could be described as jocular dismissiveness when he answered a question of Dr Foskey’s about alternative transport—“I am not subsidising your roller skates.” That was fine.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .