RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS - Queensland Parliament ...

2268 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 31 Oct 2012
was nothing bipartisan about the LNP’s decision to kick the opposition out of Parliament House. It was a
deliberate strategy against the democratic interests of all Queenslanders and it is a great shame in the
democracy of this state.
Mr STEVENS (Mermaid Beach—LNP) (3.39 pm): Thank you very much for the opportunity to
speak on this report. It really saddens me to hear the pitiful diatribe that I have just listened to from the
member for Bundamba about matters that concern the CLA which are, in particular, the poorest
reflection on her members that I can ever imagine a member of a party giving about the leadership of
the Labor Party that has its three senior members on that CLA. Madam Speaker, you chair the CLA—
and chair it brilliantly, I might add—on an independent basis without a vote on any matter except budget
matters. The bottom line is that this committee is made up of equal numbers of government members
and opposition members. Quite clearly, the reason that the member for Bundamba did not get to ask all
of the questions, as she so wilfully tried to do, was the fact that there are 89 members—88 without you,
Madam Speaker—entitled to ask a question of the CLA. She can get in line with the other 88 members.
This committee is a balanced committee between government and opposition and she has no more
rights than any other member in this House.
If she had a concern she should have gone to her own Labor members on that committee which
is delicately balanced at three all. Quite clearly the member for Bundamba has been full of political
mischief, full of self promotion and full of some new wonderful aura that she is creating about being the
attack dog for the Labor Party in this House. It is absolutely pathetic, unbelievable and quite
disappointing for the good folk of Bundamba who had the misfortune to have her returned as their
member at the last election.
The CLA has operated very efficiently, as the reports indicate. We dealt with difficult matters such
as budget cuts that we faced right across-the-board, as did every other department. That was dealt with
in a totally appropriate way. It was dealt with cooperatively. The fact that these financial targets and
tasks had to be addressed was dealt with with understanding by Labor and government members. The
CEO on behalf of the Parliamentary Service, the Clerk of the Parliament, has delivered those in a very
distinguished and delicate manner. I congratulate his financial delivery of the Parliamentary Service. He
is very much across all issues in relation to the financial status of the Parliamentary Service. It has been
delivered in accordance with all benchmarks and parameters.
There were implications even at that meeting from the member for Bundamba. They were
absolutely ridiculous. She raised in that report petty political issues such as the Bernays Room. We told
her it cost $1,400 over and over again. Unfortunately she wanted the CEO to go through all this extra
work and time and cost to confirm it was $1,400 over and over again. What part of $1,400 can the
member for Bundamba not understand?
Mr Ruthenberg: The common-sense part.
Mr STEVENS: I take the interjection from the member: the common-sense part. This is very
much the member for Bundamba’s wonderful new high-flying style. She even took it upon herself to
attack what it cost to set up other members’ offices. As she might have noticed around this House, there
were a lot of new members elected at the last election, mainly because of the disgusting way her
government ran the previous 53rd Parliament.
Mrs MILLER: I rise to a point of order. We still do not have an answer on why it cost $4,000 for
the member for Ipswich’s signage.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Bundamba, I warn you under 253A for frivolous interjections.
Mr STEVENS: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. There were costs that were identified that
were reasonable in terms of individual fitouts that were all done in accordance with the Parliamentary
Service. They were done independently by the Clerk of the Parliament who has been independent in
this parliament and every other parliament before it. The slur that she puts on the independent officers is
atrocious and not befitting of a member of this parliament and certainly not for the people of Bundamba.
Mr PITT (Mulgrave—ALP) (3.44 pm): I rise to make a very brief contribution following the remarks
by the honourable Manager of Government Business. I wish to put on the record that he is quite correct
in saying that there is very much a collegiate spirit between the members of the government and the
non-government members on the Committee of the Legislative Assembly. It is not, however, correct to
say that we were in concert and supporting and understanding of all of the budget cuts that were
required. That would imply that the opposition in Queensland understands the broader government cuts
and acknowledges that we accept the cuts and the rationale of the Newman government in making
those cuts which subsequently required cuts to the parliament. I think it is very important that we have
that on the record.
I wish to reiterate that the collegiate approach of the Committee of the Legislative Assembly is
something that I think is a work in progress but travelling fairly well at this stage.
Report adopted.
Clauses 1 to 6, as read, agreed to.
Schedules 1 to 3, as read, agreed to.