Page 3059 - Week 07 - Thursday, 1 July 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
easier passage through here had we had the benefit of that advice from the scrutiny of bills and subordinate legislation committee, because we would have had a reason why X needed to be the case to support the common good—not just our idea of what that may be. I do not believe that you can mess around with people’s rights and privileges and their liberties if you are a rank amateur at this. With the best will in the world, we are essentially rank amateurs at this. It is my understanding that we have three lawyers in the place, unless I am wrong. But did we ask them about this particular part of the legislation? No, we did not. We talked about other things.
It was an extreme disappointment for me that we were not able to run the flag up the pole on Tuesday early enough for the consideration of those amendments by the scrutiny of bills and subordinate legislation committee’s legal adviser—I would have preferred it—and I am not so sure it was inadvertent. I am not convinced it was inadvertent. It was either incompetence or conspiracy and I leave it to members here to work out which one it was. I just think it is an appalling state of affairs. I do not have anything more to say.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra), by leave: Mr Hargreaves sought the leave of this place to make a brief statement which turned into an attack. There was no conspiracy to prevent this statement from being made. Whether it was made on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, it would have made no difference because the rules set by the scrutiny of bills committee and outlined in the statement were that it would want 14 days notice to deal with amendments. Mr Hargreaves is just trying to make an issue where none exists.
Leave of absence
Motion (by Mr Barr) agreed to:
That leave of absence be granted for all Members from the conclusion of this sitting until 16 August 2010.
Appropriation Bill 2010-2011
[Cognate paper: Estimates 2010-2011—Select Committee report—government response]
Debate resumed from 30 June 2010.
Proposed expenditure—Part 1.12—ACT Health—$826,910,000 (net cost of outputs), $196,981,000 (capital injection) and $710,000 (payments on behalf of the territory), totalling $1,024,601,000.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (11.36): In dealing with health, I believe it is worth going to some of the widely publicised cultural issues that exist within health in the ACT. They are cultural issues which, I think, cannot be totally dissociated from some of the very poor results we are seeing in a number of indicators in healthcare in the ACT.
I think that when we look at the minister’s attitude to what has gone on in relation to these cultural issues of bullying and the like, there has, for a long time, been a real
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video