Page 2972 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 30 June 2010

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

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 9		Noes 4
Mr Barr	Ms Hunter	Mrs Dunne	Mr Seselja
Ms Bresnan	Ms Le Couteur	Mr Hanson	Mr Smyth
Mr Corbell	Mr Rattenbury
Ms Gallagher	Mr Stanhope
Mr Hargreaves

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Question put:

That Mr Seselja’s motion, as amended, be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 9		Noes 4

Mr Barr	Ms Hunter	Mrs Dunne	Mr Seselja
Ms Bresnan	Ms Le Couteur	Mr Hanson	Mr Smyth
Mr Corbell	Mr Rattenbury
Ms Gallagher	Mr Stanhope
Mr Hargreaves

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Executive business—precedence

Ordered that executive business be called on.

Appropriation Bill 2010-2011

[Cognate paper: Estimates 2010-2011—Select Committee report—government response]

Debate resumed from 29 June 2010.

Proposed expenditure—Part 1.7—Department of Land and Property Services—$8,610,000 (net cost of outputs) and $24,708,000 (capital injection), totalling $33,318,000.

MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (8.10): It is worth talking a little bit about the activities of the Land Development Agency in this line. We have looked at a number of areas in the past where the Land Development Agency has engaged in what we would regard as wasteful spending. I think that there is still evidence of some of that, although I would say that is not as egregious as we have seen in the past. We do see what is effectively a monopoly supplier of land engaging in spending significant amounts of taxpayers’ money on things such as advertising.

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