Page 664 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 5 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
only way that we can delay the discussion of the matter here and now is to put it in the hands of a select committee which can then be satisfied and which can satisfy the public that consultation has taken place. Indeed, it has already.
The Liberal Party, before it put the Bill forward, went into a lengthy period of public consultation. The fact that the Government says that we did not does not make it so; in fact, we did. The Bill was agreed to by most of those people, if not all of them, who will be affected by this. Our purpose is to satisfy the Government's objection, which I believe is a spurious one anyway because it would dearly love to knock the thing off so that it never sees the light of day. Do not ask me why, but that would be its intention.
Our purpose is to put it in the hands of a select committee for a very limited time so that the public can be satisfied that, if they have anything to say that they have not already said, they can have an opportunity to do it. It will then come back from the select committee, and the debate on the floor of the house will take place. We are not trying to stifle debate; we are trying to improve the debate, to make sure that people are fully informed, to make sure that the misconceptions out there that the Labor Party has instilled are dispelled.
I listened to a radio program this morning, and it was quite clear that none of the people, including the radio commentator who was leading the debate, even knew what the Bill was about. It was a very uninformed debate, and it was uninformed because the Labor Party has fed this misconception through the trade union movement that the whole thing is aimed at it. It is not aimed at it; it is not aimed at public dissent; it is not aimed at public protest. It is aimed at street hoodlums whom we, the Liberal Party, and our colleagues in the Residents Rally want to get off the street so that it is safe for the normal members of the public to go out there and travel. That is the reason why we want to refer it to a select committee.
Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, I rise on the same point of order again. The issue is about whether or not standing orders ought to be suspended. We are not debating the issue. I heard Mr Kaine complain similarly not so long ago.
MR KAINE: I did, indeed.
MR SPEAKER: Just a moment, Mr Kaine. Please resume your seat. The position is that I incorrectly allowed the Chief Minister to debate the issue that was not at hand. I am obliged therefore to give the Leader of the Opposition the opportunity to do likewise. However, as I reminded members, we now have only 15 minutes in total to debate the suspension of standing orders. You will get your opportunity to debate the issue at hand after standing
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .