Page 594 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 22 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
gas powered data centre. Indeed, one of those people physically threatened me during the course of the 2008 election campaign at the Kambah and Calwell shopping centres.
I know Mr Smyth stoked those people over these issues and that Mr Smyth was behind much of the nastiness in the coup to change the executive of the council. My failure was to react to his baitings and those of his colleagues. I reiterate my apology for that reaction to the Assembly and to my colleagues particularly.
I would also like to reiterate my apology to the council. My conversation with Mr Johnston revealed that those people with whom I have had such distasteful dealings are no longer part of the executive. The council has sharpened its focus on specific issues and broadened its base in terms of connecting with the Tuggeranong community at large, and I congratulate Mr Johnston and the executive on this.
Just one small departure from my prepared speech—Mr Smyth says that if I went to the council meetings I would be able to see this. I was a member of the council for 20 years before not renewing that membership. Also, in the recent year or two, the meeting times have changed from a Thursday evening to the first Tuesday in the month. I have had a commitment for the first Tuesday in the month since 1988, so that clash prevents me from doing anything other than discharging that 1988 commitment.
Mr Speaker, the real motivation for this motion is not the confected outrage of those opposite. I know Mr Smyth has not spoken to Mr Johnston. He has not spoken to him. This motion is all about creating a smokescreen to shield Mr Seselja and the Liberal MLAs from the blowtorch of community scrutiny being directed at them now. It is all about diversion. It is all about creating another target.
This Assembly has experienced a new paradigm, a new orthodoxy. This Assembly has seen an attempt from this side of the chamber and from the crossbench to create a chamber where there is a contest of ideas and not a combative and abusive chamber for personal attack. Mr Speaker, I have recognised this new paradigm and tried to go with it. My reaction to the abuse of those opposite last week was a lapse into the old paradigm and the old orthodoxy. I apologise for that lapse into the old ways. We all have our challenges, but at least I recognise mine. I doubt that those opposite actually recognise a new paradigm let alone embrace it.
We have seen no contest of ideas. The government and the crossbench have put forward real policies and ideas for debate, but those opposite have merely been spoilers and nay-sayers. Theirs is the battleground of the gladiator, not the incubator of ideas.
I have actually done that which the original motion wished, but l cannot support such a blatant piece of political opportunism. Mr Smyth’s exploitation of the council is to be regretted. He could have spoken to Mr Johnston, as, indeed, I am aware the Chief Minister has, Ms Bresnan has, I have and Minister Burch has. We have all had the opportunity to have a conversation with Mr Johnston. But Mr Smyth comes into this chamber without having done so.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video