Tuesday 31 August 2010
Legislative Council

[7.02 p.m.]
Mr FINCH (Rosevears) - I have been listening carefully to try to find a way to make a decision here. It seems to me that I am listening to the debate across the Chamber and particularly the praise that was given to two members here for the protest vote that they took because they felt at the time they did not have enough information on which to base a strong decision. Whilst the member for Murchison will contend that the information is there through the report and through the motion we have had since Friday, I get a sense myself that even though I have read notes and I have read the information up until now I still do not feel equipped to take on the debate, the substantive debate about the issue because I think that the arguments that I am hearing from the government members are correct. This has far-reaching effects about the way we go about the process of our committee work in the future.

I cannot reconcile myself that there is the imperative that the member for Murchison is putting forward, because we have put the argument forward so often to the House about the fact that we do not like being rushed. We do not want to be rushed and that is our pre-Christmas period that the member for Huon referred to. Every Christmas we have the same process and we complain and we huff and puff and we say this is not appropriate, this is not right for the mature debate that we should be having on some very important issues and I put this right up there as an issue. I think it is a very, very important debate and I do not want to see us rush it. As the honourable Treasurer said, we have to understand the implications fully of what our decisions are going to be and I have a sense that I will not be able to make a strong contribution and make a decision I am comfortable with if we proceed with the debate now, so I support the adjournment.