Page 4644 - Week 12 - Thursday, 1 November 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I conclude by saying that drones are the technology of the future and I am excited for the day that I can also get a burrito delivered to my house like Mr Parton. But this is not a debate about drones. We are all in agreement that drones are the future of technology in this place; they are the future of commerce, delivery and transport. But this is about parliamentary process, and that parliamentary process is being stomped all over and I do not understand why.
MS CHEYNE (Ginninderra) (12.13): I welcome an inquiry into drone technology, and I know Project Wing has stated at least twice if not publicly that they would welcome an inquiry. While I have not had the fortune of getting my burrito delivered fresh and hot like Mr Parton has, drone technology is clearly very exciting. The ACT is well known as being a great place to trial things, and I think it is very good that the trial is underway. I have been watching it with interest, and I have watched Mr Parton’s video at least once—but perhaps a few more times. I note that Mr Parton and I celebrated six years as Facebook friends this week.
Members interjecting—
MS CHEYNE: They have certainly raised other issues, and while there are some very active members of the south side—the deep south community—who have concerns, I note that concerns have also been raised with me by people who have not been affected but are wondering about what drone technology means for them. Drone technology looks like it could mean some pretty amazing things, not just hot food delivered quickly and cheaply but also perhaps medical advancements.
While drones look cool, they certainly seem to be very noisy and I can appreciate why there is some angst in the community. Madam Speaker has spoken with me before about the representations she has received in the community, and she supports an inquiry as well.
However, like my colleagues on this side, I question how this has come about and I echo the comments of Ms Orr and Mr Pettersson that the Canberra Liberals and the Greens have some form in this place. I have read the Hansard transcript from that time—
The extended time allotted to Assembly business having expired—
Standing orders—suspension
Motion (by Mr Gentleman) agreed to, with the concurrence of an absolute majority:
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Assembly concluding debate on Assembly business, Notices Nos 1 and 2.
MS CHEYNE: I have read the Hansard transcript and I appreciate the context in which Minister Rattenbury was saying things at the time, but I also believe that Mr Pettersson is right; it is about the principle of the thing. I note that Mr Coe at the time said that he believed committees should be afforded a degree of autonomy in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video