Page 148 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 28 November 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
in four years time. We will see the ads replayed. In four years time they will look at that from Katy Gallagher where she said, “It is not true. It is going to be a cup of coffee a week. That is all it is going to cost you.” People will look at their rates bill and know that she was not telling the truth. They will look at their rates bill and they will know that you were not being honest with the community. If you are honest, why would you not release it?
Ms Gallagher: Don’t give me lectures on being honest with the community.
MR SESELJA: Why would you not release it? Absolutely; very happy to compare notes.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, sit down. Stop the clock, please. Ms Gallagher, please stop addressing Mr Seselja across the chamber. Mr Seselja, please refer to me. Do not address your comments to Ms Gallagher.
MR SESELJA: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Address your comments to the chair.
MR SESELJA: I will. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will address them to you because, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would be very happy to compare notes on honesty and truthfulness with the Chief Minister. She told people, she told the community, that this was not really going to mean anything for them. You could get all of the benefit with none of the pain. That was the message that she gave the community. “A cup of coffee a week—what is that? A cup of coffee a week—that is nothing.” That was the message.
Having said for the last few years that cost of living is not an issue—turn off the Foxtel for a while; you will be right—she then looked them in the eye and said, “Nothing to see here. Nothing to see here.” If there was nothing to see here then you would be very happy to release it, would you not, Madam Deputy Speaker?
Mr Hanson interjecting—
Ms Gallagher interjecting—
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Hanson and Ms Gallagher!
MR SESELJA: You would be very happy to release the numbers. The fact that they will not, the fact that they still refuse suggests they have something very serious to hide. It suggests that all of that modelling that was done as part of the Quinlan review was right. No-one said that it was wrong. No-one has given an alternative as to how they are going to get there.
She looked people in the eye and said, “We’re getting rid of stamp duty.” When are you getting rid of stamp duty? It is in 20 years. She did not say that bit in her announcement. It is 20 years. She did not say that before the election. She said, “We’re getting rid of stamp duty.” If you are getting rid of stamp duty, replacing it
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video