Mr EDE - 1995-08-17
On ABC television on Tuesday night, members would have seen the Chief Minister say that discussion papers such as his proposal to decriminalise cannabis possession are part of the Territorys push for statehood. The Chief Ministers Discussion Paper No 1 suggests that the following be treated in the same way: (1) the unlicensed possession of a machine gun; (2) administering to yourself a large dose of heroin, cocaine or LSD; (3) allowing someone else to administer to you a dose of heroin, cocaine or LSD;
Page 728
(4) having in your possession not just a small amount of cannabis but also amphetamines, mescaline, morphine, opium in any form ...
Mr Stone: That is schedule 1, stupid.
Mr EDE: ... anabolic steroids and also 200 other drugs. Is this also a part of the Country Liberal Partys strategy to advance the case for statehood?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is careless with the truth.
The fact is that it was the commentator, for those who recall, who made the observation that this may be seen in the wider context.
Mr Ede: Garbage!
Mr STONE: I challenge the Leader of the Opposition to produce any transcript which shows that I said that.
Mr Ede: He said that he asked you, and you said ...
Mr Bailey: Oh, so it is no longer ...
Mr STONE: It is not what you said.
Mr Ede: Are you recanting that?
Mr STONE: It is no wonder that people grow up with a distrust of politicians when a member can come into the Chamber, tell a barefaced lie and think that he can skate across the ice when he said in his question you said.
Mr Ede: Did you challenge it?
Mr STONE: In fact, it was the commentator in his introduction, in his promo, who made the observation. That is the first point.
Mr Ede: No, he said that he put it to you.
Mr STONE: That is the first point.
Mr Bailey: That point was in relation to decriminalising marijuana.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: I know that the Leader of the Opposition feels uncomfortable because he is forever being caught out in the blatant dishonesty that he hurls across this Chamber. Can I say that the discussion paper is entirely as it is described, and the offences that
Page 729
comprise it come from those who are intimately associated with the criminal justice system. The suggestions were made by police, prosecutors and those who work as defence counsel. I have placed them on the table for discussion. They would not take any hope that the Leader of the Opposition would ever be prepared to discuss anything. Instead, he would seek to score cheap political points simply because he feels he has been gazumped. I do not care whether he feels he has been gazumped. He has an opportunity here to contribute to a very worthwhile discussion.
Over 1500 of these discussion papers have been sought and sent out already. That indicates to me a high level of community interest on the part of people to have their say. The Leader of the Opposition tries to come in here and say that we should not give people the opportunity to have a say. As I said, the suggested range of offences across all those acts came from those who know best - namely, police, prosecutors and the legal profession, all of whom are intimately involved. When the Leader of the Opposition gets to his feet and starts reeling off the list of drugs, he should refer back to the discussion paper. I talk about schedule 2 drugs, not schedule 1 drugs. That is another example ...
Mr Ede: You are wrong! Get it right. You do not know what you put in the discussion paper.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: That is another example of the Leader of the Opposition gilding the lily to try to create an impression that members on this side of the House are in favour of a helter-skelter approach. The Leader of the Opposition should refer to the first line of the paper, which says Discussion Paper. That is what it says, and that is what it is.
Mr Ede: It says A proposal. A proposal would be to extend ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Page 730
Page 728
(4) having in your possession not just a small amount of cannabis but also amphetamines, mescaline, morphine, opium in any form ...
Mr Stone: That is schedule 1, stupid.
Mr EDE: ... anabolic steroids and also 200 other drugs. Is this also a part of the Country Liberal Partys strategy to advance the case for statehood?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is careless with the truth.
The fact is that it was the commentator, for those who recall, who made the observation that this may be seen in the wider context.
Mr Ede: Garbage!
Mr STONE: I challenge the Leader of the Opposition to produce any transcript which shows that I said that.
Mr Ede: He said that he asked you, and you said ...
Mr Bailey: Oh, so it is no longer ...
Mr STONE: It is not what you said.
Mr Ede: Are you recanting that?
Mr STONE: It is no wonder that people grow up with a distrust of politicians when a member can come into the Chamber, tell a barefaced lie and think that he can skate across the ice when he said in his question you said.
Mr Ede: Did you challenge it?
Mr STONE: In fact, it was the commentator in his introduction, in his promo, who made the observation. That is the first point.
Mr Ede: No, he said that he put it to you.
Mr STONE: That is the first point.
Mr Bailey: That point was in relation to decriminalising marijuana.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: I know that the Leader of the Opposition feels uncomfortable because he is forever being caught out in the blatant dishonesty that he hurls across this Chamber. Can I say that the discussion paper is entirely as it is described, and the offences that
Page 729
comprise it come from those who are intimately associated with the criminal justice system. The suggestions were made by police, prosecutors and those who work as defence counsel. I have placed them on the table for discussion. They would not take any hope that the Leader of the Opposition would ever be prepared to discuss anything. Instead, he would seek to score cheap political points simply because he feels he has been gazumped. I do not care whether he feels he has been gazumped. He has an opportunity here to contribute to a very worthwhile discussion.
Over 1500 of these discussion papers have been sought and sent out already. That indicates to me a high level of community interest on the part of people to have their say. The Leader of the Opposition tries to come in here and say that we should not give people the opportunity to have a say. As I said, the suggested range of offences across all those acts came from those who know best - namely, police, prosecutors and the legal profession, all of whom are intimately involved. When the Leader of the Opposition gets to his feet and starts reeling off the list of drugs, he should refer back to the discussion paper. I talk about schedule 2 drugs, not schedule 1 drugs. That is another example ...
Mr Ede: You are wrong! Get it right. You do not know what you put in the discussion paper.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: That is another example of the Leader of the Opposition gilding the lily to try to create an impression that members on this side of the House are in favour of a helter-skelter approach. The Leader of the Opposition should refer to the first line of the paper, which says Discussion Paper. That is what it says, and that is what it is.
Mr Ede: It says A proposal. A proposal would be to extend ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Page 730
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016