Sort by new.
Cr Johnston is speaking to a report “on how the Olympic Games are going to be delivered”. She’s criticising the decision to demolish and move the East Brisbane State School—a project made necessary by the expansion of the Gabba for the Olympics—when she gets interrupted and told that what she’s saying is “not relevant to the report”.
Deputy Mayor says it’s about “transport, accommodation, and accessibility”, and that EBSS is a State Government project.
Cr Johnston later retorts that the report does in fact mention “infrastructure” and “stakeholders”, among many other things.
So I wonder what these stakeholders might be planning to deliver from an infrastructure point of view… Could it be that they’re going to knock down the Gabba and raze a heritaged-listed school in East Brisbane, so they can make a slightly bigger stadium for a successful delivery of the games? Would that be infrastructure?
The Chair, Cr Toomey; Deputy Mayor, Cr Adams; and Cr Murphy work together to stifle her criticism.
But of course the LNP don’t want you talking about “what infrastructure?”
The Chair eventually uses his formal powers of reprimand to force Cr Johnston to stop talking about EBSS. Cr Johnston moves dissent. Labor and the Greens abstain from the dissent motion, which is voted down by the LNP 18-1.
In the last 15 seconds of her speech after that reprimand, she says
This is a disgraceful intimidation tactic by the LNP to stop discussion about one of the worst pieces of public policy which is the destruction of a school for an Olympic venue, which is wrong and I don’t support it.
