Page 3031 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Mr Hanson, sit down for a moment. Stop the clock, please. Mr Barr, let us resume normal debate. Address yourselves through the chair, Mr Hanson. Please continue, Mr Hanson.
MR HANSON: Thanks, Mr Assistant Speaker. So we recommend the ACT. I am surprised that is not in the motion today, actually—recommending the ACT. They have everything else that they are doing. It is pretty good. Let us have a look at recommendation 509 in this insightful report analysing the budget:
Dr Bourke and Mr Gentleman noted that the ACT Government’s large-scale solar auction process incorporated advice to the Minister—
Right!
Dr Bourke and Mr Gentleman recommend the Government be commended for this process.
Well done! Well done, I say. Hear, hear! Look, I think it is fair to say that perhaps they think it is unusual that the government would listen to some independent expert advice from a panel or something like that. Anyway, they probably do, and the government should be commended for that. What is this one? Recommendation 527 states in part, “Dr Bourke and Mr Gentleman recommend the ACT Government for this allocation.” Dr Bourke and Mr Gentleman recommend the ACT government for this allocation. I do not know what that means. Maybe Dr Bourke can explain that one at some stage.
Here you go; do you remember how they criticised me, Mr Assistant Speaker, how this report was such a problem and how the committee was so dysfunctional? At recommendation 569 they “recommend the Assembly committees be commended for working effectively”.
What they said arising from the estimates was that there is no evidence that the current committees are not working properly. There is no evidence. I am sorry; I go back to where I am condemned for being so partisan. But by the time they had got through all of the recommendations, they are commending the committee for working so effectively. That is nice, is it not?
We then have recommendation 571 where they recommend that “ACTEW be commended for its understanding of these issues” ACTEW came along and had a chat and, you know, they are commended for understanding the issues. I am being a little light-hearted but I contend that when it comes to Dr Bourke and Mr Gentleman—I certainly hope Mr Gentleman is also going to speak—these gentlemen who accused me of being so partisan, so biased in the chairmanship of the committee, do seem to have a little bit of a one-eyed view when it comes to the ACT government and their programs.
What I would say is that like the dissenting report, which is full of errors, duplications, typos, nonsense recommendations, congratulating the government and recommending the ACT, we are seeing something similar here in the motion that has been presented
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video