Page 2694 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 12 August 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
denied to the Mocca community. If ministers in this place had only taken the time earlier to talk to these communities, much of this angst and community upheaval need not have occurred.
I place on record my thanks and appreciation to the hardworking parents—I apologise if I miss some people in this—to the Telopea park P&C community, to the board of the school, to Paul Haesler, president of the P&C, to Hugh Griffin, and to the parent who first alerted my office to the problem very early in the new year. You know who you are, and I thank you for telling me about your concerns and making me aware of the issue that was about to get very, very serious. Thanks to Robby McGarvey and her Mocca community and to Rebecca Scouller and Anne Forrest and, indeed, all other inner south community councils who have been put through the ringer over what to do and where to go. They have spent hours on this issue, which has cost not only their calm but also an opportunity to get on with their lives in other matters. They have had to concentrate on this issue for far too long.
I want to answer a couple of points made by Minister Rattenbury. He spoke about what is there in Mr Barr’s motion. Mr Barr’s motion almost tries to simplify things. We can never quite trust Mr Barr. There are some weasel words in there that he will use to his own advantage. We have had about 10 minutes to study his motion. Normally, after a while, we discover where his weasel words will take effect. I guess I should ask what else has it got apart from Mr Rattenbury’s motion? We thought Mr Rattenbury’s motion covered the areas. I believe the community asked Mr Rattenbury to put his amended version in. I believe that was the request made of him. If that is the case, he has spoken against what the electors have asked him to do.
It is a community that recently he has spent a lot of time listening to. Certainly last night he spent a lot of time listening to them and putting their thoughts into what we thought was a reasonable amendment that did not get rid of all the historical aspects. To answer Mr Rattenbury’s question, what is not in Mr Barr’s motion is the history of it; it is Mr Barr’s version of the history, which we all know cannot be trusted. There are things in there that do not reflect what happened in the community. It is Mr Barr’s version of what has happened.
Mr Rattenbury, I said to you some time ago, if there was ever an issue that you should support—
Mr Gentleman: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker, the standing orders call for members to direct their comments through the chair, not directly to other members in the Assembly.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Doszpot—
MR DOSZPOT: Thank you, Madam Deputy Chair, and I welcome—
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just a moment. Resume your seat. Stop the clock. I remind you, Mr Doszpot, to address people through me. All your comments go through the chair. Thank you, Mr Doszpot.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video