Page 2464 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 August 2007

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


community. We have put a lot of money and a lot of effort into our no waste and recycling projects. An amount of $120,000 is allocated for planning for remediation and rehabilitation of the former Belconnen landfill site and we have similarly developed a master plan for the Mugga Lane landfill facility.

These folk would do well to examine what they have said in their press releases, what they have said on the record in the committee, and in the dissenting report to this chamber. They need to be absolutely right. You can call it semantics, you can call it pedantry, you can call it what you like; but if the result, through inadvertence or deliberate action, is a misleading of the Assembly or a committee, that is a serious offence. I will be asking for some advice very shortly on whether that has been constituted. I do not mind being hit up for a policy or something that I have done but I do mind being criticised when there has been a blatant misleading of the committee. (Time expired.)

MRS DUNNE: (Ginninderra) (5.08): It is interesting that members of the government have decided to take the afternoon to attempt to slap people down. I notice that you, yourself, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, made a fairly limp attempt to try to slap people down in asking Mr Pratt, in relation to the Justinian Street graffiti, why he did not go and hand himself into the police. In fact, as we all know, Mr Pratt did go to the police very soon after the incident because there was some doubt about the legality as to whether or not this was a legal graffiti site. He went also because he was advised that the police were investigating the matter; he went to give a statement. On that basis alone, Mr Gentleman should apologise: he implies that in some way Mr Pratt is some sort of skulker who will not face up to the issues.

Mr Mulcahy: He misrepresented the matter.

MRS DUNNE: He may not have misrepresented the matter, Mr Mulcahy; he may have been simply ignorant of the facts. He also raised the issue—and this is common knowledge—about the website. Mr Pratt and his staff did interrogate the website before the graffiti cleaning events in early April. That is common knowledge. I have a copy of the website that was downloaded at the time—this one was actually downloaded on the Monday after the events—to confirm what was done. I seek leave to table the paper.

Leave granted.

MRS DUNNE: I thank members. I table the following paper:

Community art murals and legal graffiti sites—Listing of sites, together with extract from the Department of Territory and Municipal Services’ website, dated 17 April 2007.

The paper is a list of the community arts murals, legal graffiti art sites and community arts murals. They are all here. This was all inspected beforehand and there was no sign of the subject or the area being on any of these lists. There is also an understanding that bridges are not an approved zone for graffiti. At the very least, Mr Gentleman does not keep up with what has actually been going on in this discussion but is pretty keen to come in here and sling some dirt.


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