Page 5870 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 7 December 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (4.19): It is important that we suspend the standing orders so we can have a proper debate about why these matters should be adjourned because of the nature of the approach the government has taken. Mr Corbell, with his usual propensity to want to spin things, makes slightly over two weeks almost a month. We have crossed the halfway point.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): Mrs Dunne, you are straying into the substance of the debate.
MRS DUNNE: I am responding, Mr Assistant Speaker, to the comments made by the attorney about why the matter should not be adjourned. I am closing the debate and responding to those matters. Mr Corbell is trying to give the impression that there has been plenty of time and that these are not complex bills. But there are more people involved in making a decision about whether or not a bill gets passage in this place than just members of this place. Our responsibility as members of this place is to ensure that we represent members of the community and that the community are aware that there is legislation before this place and they have an opportunity to have a say on it.
Most organisations that we deal with are often voluntary organisations or they do not meet regularly. They can only put forward their views after their body has considered the matter and come back with a view. That does not usually happen overnight. Occasionally it happens overnight—occasionally it happens in a short period of time—but for volunteer organisations especially it does not happen like that. They might meet once a month.
It has been the convention, until the standing orders changed in this place at the beginning of this Assembly, that there was a clear month for consultation. That was the case when Mr Humphries was the manager of government business. It was the case when I first started attending government business meetings in this place. Ms Tucker and Dr Foskey were very keen to ensure that there was a clear month so as to allow time for consultation with the community.
It is up to members, on a case-by-case basis, as Mr Rattenbury has said, to make a decision on whether we should go ahead with debate on the two bills listed this afternoon and the ones listed for Thursday. But I am flagging that the opposition is unhappy at the rushed nature of the passage of this legislation. It is clear that Mr Rattenbury has concerns too about the management of government business in this place. We are putting it on the record that the manager of government business needs to get better at managing government business and ensuring that there is time for proper consultation with the community about the passage of these pieces of legislation.
It is not about us; it is about us talking to the community and ensuring that the community understands and is in support of the legislation. If there are problems with the legislation, it is incumbent upon us to bring forward the community’s concerns and represent the community’s concerns. That is why I am moving the suspension of standing orders.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video