Page 1362 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
will look at every option,” because, in that, if she has not done that work, then of course what she said to the Assembly would not be true. And God forbid that a minister would say something to the Assembly that is not true.
The problem for this is that this deal started in secret. That is your problem, minister. It started in secret because you told the electorate, before the 2008 election, “All our plans are on the table.” So one could really ask the question: what other secret plans were not revealed in the lead-up to the 2008 election, like the plan to close schools was not considered or released in the lead-up to the 2004 election? When you have got form on this, minister, that is when people start to doubt your word. You dig your own grave; you make your own bed on this issue.
In the lead-up to the 2004 election you said there were no plans to shut schools. That lasted less than six weeks after the election—six weeks. We have got the document where the minister wanted a heads of agreement signed before we went into caretaker in 2008.
Ms Gallagher: It was not signed.
MR SMYTH: Oh, it was not: “I failed to get what I wanted; therefore, it is okay.” It is kind of like the Labor club, isn’t it? “We failed to influence the sale of the Labor club; therefore, we haven’t done anything wrong. We failed to get the heads of agreement in secret to lock an incoming government into a position that they had no idea that they would have been getting into.” And that is what upsets people. It is this secret, this snide, this underhand, activity, minister, that you were undertaking, behind closed doors, in secret, despite protesting—your own words, minister—“all our plans are on the table”. Is it any wonder that people doubt what you say?
It is interesting that Mr Stanhope, who was riding shotgun—and, if you are having Jon Stanhope ride shotgun next to you, you should be wearing Kevlar, because it is bloody dangerous; he has just proven it—said the only motivation was to improve health care in the ACT. But the government’s concept of improving health care is: there will be no change to the delivery of health in the ACT; we are just spending the money.
What is the motivation here? He said, “I dispute the nay-sayers.” There again the Chief Minister attacks those who have a view contrary to his or his government’s. Who are the nay-sayers? Tony Harris, Sinclair Davidson and Terry Dwyer are nay-sayers now because they have the temerity to question this government. He said, “We are desperately seeking to make this happen”. Well, if you want it to happen, get people on board by sharing the information. Show us the work that you have done. But, if you have not done the work, I would be embarrassed. If you have got nothing to table tomorrow afternoon, it will be a damning indictment of the minister, because she said in this place earlier this year: “Everything is on the table. We are going to do the work. We are going to look at every option.” But apparently it has not been done. Yet again the minister has not done the work. And that is the problem.
Ms Gallagher: Wrong.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video