Page 229 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 10 December 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
delete that because they are not insisting that it be tabled today. Just delete it. The second part states, “In the event that the Chief Minister fails to table the strategic and functional review by the end of the sitting day.” Nobody is requiring him to do that; so it is not a matter of “in the event”. He will not table it this afternoon. So let us be honest here. Why don’t we just amend this and say, “When the Chief Minister fails, we will go to this standing order that does not exist, that has not been formed, that does not have a process, that has not been funded and will not happen until some time next year”? That is accountability from the Greens. Be honest with us. Change it to “when” the Chief Minister does not do this, because he is not going to do it.
Mr Rattenbury: Are you formally moving an amendment?
MR SMYTH: You say you will continue to support the essence of the motion. Well, as one of you said this morning, Dr Foskey had courage. Have that same courage now. Principles now apparently go out the window when it will cost, when you might have to fight something in the court, when you will hold the government accountable. “Well, that’s too hard. We won’t stick to our principles.” Or: “It’s not in the agreement. It’s not in the agreement; it can go out the window as well.” Well, perhaps the agreement is a poor agreement.
What we should have is a clear explanation in this place of why, just four months after Dr Foskey moved exactly the same motion, the Greens do not support it today. The proclaimed courageous Dr Foskey of the inaugural speech this morning has just been let down. She has been dishonoured because her tradition just stopped, because there is no accountability. The Greens talk about taking out insurance. Insurance for what—the continuing practices of the government in their arrogance not to be held accountable by this place? At the end of the day, this is the highest court in the territory. We are the people who make the laws. Our job is to hold the government accountable, and we should do that. We cannot do that without the information they have hidden for more than two years. This motion, when it is amended today, will allow them to hide for a further period of time.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (4.03): I rise to address the fact that there is more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak. We just had a long dissertation from Mr Smyth on whether the Greens in fact have the courage to go through this process. What I would say is that the Greens, as we are in most other matters, are committed to long-term thinking. We are committed to more than just today’s political point scoring; we are committed to more than just tomorrow’s headline; we are committed to getting real outcomes.
Rather than relying simply on having the numbers on the floor of the chamber, which at the moment may be the case or may not be the case, we are committed to setting up a system that will last for assemblies to come. We are committed to setting up a system that will work, no matter what the numbers are on the floor of this chamber, no matter what the political affiliation is of the 17 members who are elected here. That is why we have been committed to setting up the process to get an independent arbiter.
It takes great courage to go for long-term solutions and not just to go for what will appear in tomorrow’s newspaper. It takes courage to sit down and actually put in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .