Page 3435 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 23 September 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
those matters. I hope that can be the case. I certainly encourage all members to support a unanimous resolution in relation to our sister city relationship. For that reason I have moved the further amendment. I thank members for granting me leave to do so.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (4.18): This would appear to be a unanimous resolution that is palatable only to the CFMEU. That is what this is about. The Chief Minister should stand up and tell us what he believes. He tweeted that the Australia-China preferential trade agreement would be good for Canberra exporters, but apparently he will not vote to support it. These are his words. I used his words because I thought it would make it easier for him to agree. He said in this place:
Discussion also focused on the opportunities presented following the recent completion of negotiations for a China-Australia free trade agreement. The agreement presents major trade and export opportunities in the tourism, education, health care and professional services sectors. Each of these fields present significant opportunities for the ACT’s private sector and research partnerships, and they complement the ACT government’s high-level priorities of transport reform, ongoing urban renewal, and our continuing work to build Canberra as Australia’s premier knowledge capital.
Either the minister believed that when he tabled this statement in August or he did not. He did not believe it then, because apparently he does not believe it now. The question is: what does the Chief Minister stand for in this, or has he simply been rolled by his party room who are all looking to their pre-selections and backing their CFMEU mates? Let me read his statement again:
… and they complement the ACT government’s high-level priorities of transport reform, ongoing urban renewal and our continuing work to build Canberra as Australia’s premier knowledge capital.
In fact, I took his words and wrote them into clause (3)(c) which he now seeks to delete:
support ChAFTA as part of the ACT’s high level priorities of transport reform, ongoing urban renewal and continuing work to build Canberra as Australia’s premier knowledge capital.
When you say something in August and you vote against it in September, it would normally be called hypocrisy. What one might say is that in one of these documents the Chief Minister may have misled the Assembly by saying something he did not believe in. That is up to the Chief Minister. It will be to his eternal shame. I cannot understand how on 2 September you tweeted that the Australia-China preferential trade agreement would be good for Canberra exporters but you vote against this motion today. I cannot understand how you say in August this year—a month ago—that this is a good thing for the people of the ACT and the businesses of the ACT but you will not back it up today.
This is a chief minister who is clearly not in control or it is a chief minister who says what he thinks people will listen to at the moment but does not believe in the long term. The long-term arrangement we have with our sister city in Beijing has been
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video