Page 2554 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
their speeches. We would have been only too delighted to let government members read our speeches. I do not believe that the government should vet our speeches before they are delivered.
Given that it was your choice to truncate debate tonight that seems to be the only fair thing. That is the only way you can redeem yourselves as a government—a way that respects democracy and the rules of debate on one of the most important issues that we are debating on the one late night that we have every year. If the word “graciously” is a word that can be applied to a smirking bunch of people, they should graciously invite us to submit our speeches so that they can be incorporated in Hansard. I am waiting for an invitation otherwise I am afraid that this government does not have my respect because of the way in which it treated the rest of this house tonight.
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (12.11 am): I was not aware of the arrangement that Mr Corbell tells me he entered into at 11 o’clock tonight. I would have thought, as a courtesy, as I have had responsibility for the opposition’s position and I have sat in this chamber for many hours throughout this debate, he might have extended me that courtesy.
If Mr Corbell wants to read these speeches I suggest that he should get off his tail and come and read them because his precious sensitivities will not be offended. I have not delivered an offensive speech in this place since I have been here and I am not about to start. I do not stoop to the temperamental antics that I see amongst members opposite because I am quite capable of articulating arguments on economic grounds.
Mrs Burke: Let the Speaker make the decision.
MR MULCAHY: I will let the Speaker determine the orders and not Simon Corbell. The bottom line is if that Mr Corbell wants to come and have a look at these speeches and he is so distressed that he cannot handle criticism—I know he is sensitive to criticism because we see him leap down here every time his name is mentioned—he should feel free to read them. The offer is here for him.
I share Dr Foskey’s view on this. This is the first time in self-government that anybody has ever pulled this stunt of shutting down reasonable debate and discussion. For the record, it is interesting that on Tuesday night we were getting temper tantrums from the Chief Minister. He was waving and carrying on from the other side of the chamber. On Tuesday night we were barely into the debate when the Chief Minister, who was standing near to where Mr Barr sits, said to me, “I am going to adjourn debate. I am going to shut it down. I want to go home.”
That is not the way for democracy to operate in our city. I do not retreat from the view that he has handled this inappropriately. He has hardly been here, he has not done the job, and he has all the classic signs of somebody who is letting majority government go to his head. Usually, there is an electoral outcome for governments who get arrogant. I worked for one once. It got to a point where it lost touch and the people threw it out. The fact of the matter is that this government is getting more and more out of control with its majority, it is riding over proper scrutiny, and I think the people of Canberra will be suitably disturbed by its performance.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .