Page 2945 - Week 13 - Thursday, 23 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the proposition that there is any gag on the debate. It merely means that the debate ought to be deferred, as would have been done today anyway. Once we adjourn after this debate is over none of these matters would come up before 5 December. As it is, they will come up, but they will come up on a different agenda, and it will be the agenda of a different government.
So I suggest, Mr Speaker, that we should adjourn as soon as this debate is over. I am sure the Government will want to go away and lick its wounds and determine what its course of action is going to be over the next few days. Of course, the opposition will want to do the same to sort out a few procedural matters and to determine just how we will proceed when we take government on 5 December. I think it is appropriate that we go into recess for those few days so that we can go away and order our affairs.
MR WOOD (4.06): This is remarkable. In one day we have had a resounding vote of confidence in the Government, as we did this morning when we passed the Appropriation Bill, and now we have tabled a vote of no confidence. I find that most surprising. In the one breath Mr Collaery has tabled a motion of no confidence and then asked for the suspension of standing orders. This is an unfortunate combination of motions that we should not support.
I want to express the view that the people opposite should now give some reason for the steps that they have taken. We will go out, presumably shortly, into the community and there will be intense speculation about the reasons for this. No reason has been given in here. Indeed, in six months here I have seen no possible reason. We have had, from a member temporarily absent, lots and lots of innuendo, but we have never had a sound reason expressed.
I would have thought that when he moved his motion on the grounds of logic, on the grounds of good sense, on the grounds of plain, sensible propaganda, if you like, Mr Collaery would have got up and given some indication of the background for it. He might have found some support from his partner, Mr Kaine, who might have stood up and said something about his views of this.
But nowhere have we had that indication and so we have a fortnight's speculation about the reasons for this challenge ahead of us. You are quite entitled to your challenge, but along with it you are also obliged, I believe - not in the standing orders - to specify some reasons. That motion, like any motion of no confidence I have ever heard, should specify some reasons.
Mr Humphries: Read the self-government Act. It does not say that.
MR WOOD: I said that, Mr Humphries. I did say that and I made it clear that it is not in the standing orders, but you presume to be around the place just a little.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .