Page 4464 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 14 October 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
claimed that Mr Smyth misled the Assembly. If she believes that, she should move a substantive motion.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER: I did not hear Ms Gallagher make those claims.
Ms Gallagher: I am happy to withdraw. I will consider my options on a substantive motion because what he said was incorrect, as indeed all the comments he has targeted at the Greens are as well.
MR SMYTH: “Whatever the Greens want” I think was the quote this morning.
Mrs Dunne: On a point of order, Madam Assistant Speaker: when someone is asked to withdraw—
Ms Gallagher: I have never heard you conditionally withdraw.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Ms Gallagher, please be quiet.
Mrs Dunne: When someone is asked to withdraw, the normal practice is to withdraw, not to withdraw and then give an argument about why they should not withdraw. The Treasurer should be asked to simply withdraw.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Mrs Dunne, she did withdraw. I think that is quite satisfactory. Mr Smyth, you have the floor. Clerk, please start the clock.
MR SMYTH: Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. The problem for the community is that they have seen the failures of this government on large projects like this in the past. We saw it with things like the data centre, the delivery of the prison and, of course, Gungahlin Drive. The problem is that the minister is afraid to send what she calls her financial analysis to the auditor for scrutiny—independent scrutiny and verification. And why would you be afraid of that if you were confident in your figures? Because you know that the analysis is flawed.
We now know, because the Treasurer told us this morning, that there has been no cost-benefit analysis. So if there is no cost-benefit analysis, why are we doing this? It is interesting that all the Greens have now left the chamber, Madam Assistant Speaker Le Couteur—except for yourself, of course. Your colleagues have abandoned the field. The problem is that the Treasurer said this morning, “We will answer the questions asked in the community.” The community is asking, “What is the benefit for health outcomes from this purchase?” We have heard it from the AMA, from the nurses, from so many different groups saying, “Why do we have to spend this money?” And they are not getting an answer.
It is interesting to look at the document called Future ownership and governance of Calvary Public Hospital & Clare Holland House, which is on the government’s website. It is an ACT government information paper. When you get to the part which goes to the detail, it says, “This analysis is presented on the following page.” When you turn to the following page, there are just four charts. That is the analysis that the government is putting to the community: four charts. “Look at my charts, understand my charts.”
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .