Page 2909 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 15 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR MOORE (4.02): Mr Speaker, I think that there is a great deal of merit in the matter that Mr Stevenson has raised today. I think the merit lies in the danger of getting into a habit of allowing Bills to be debated urgently. An example I would like to draw attention to is the Bill that was put up by the Labor team at private members' business last week. Immediately there was an invitation from the Government to debate that Bill at that point. Of course, the reason for wanting to debate it then and there had to do with avoiding the pressures that were being put on them and their members over the next week. Clearly, that pressure did have an impact in the long run on Dr Kinloch, and I think that he took a courageous stance. It is a shame that other people within that - - -
Mr Jensen: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I raise standing order 52 - reflection on a past vote of the Assembly.
MR SPEAKER: I am sorry, I did not hear that reflection.
MR MOORE: I did not reflect on the vote at all. I reflected on the people who made the vote.
MR SPEAKER: Would you please desist with that line of argument, Mr Moore. Please proceed.
MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, I think it is very important to raise that particular issue and I will try to avoid reflecting on the actual vote. I do not believe that I did, but I will try to take a slightly different angle to avoid offending Daffy's sense of propriety.
MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Moore! I would ask you to withdraw that. We have struck the rules for addressing members.
MR MOORE: Quite right, Mr Speaker. I withdraw calling him Duffy, Daffy - whatever it was. I withdraw it and I will refer to him as Mr Jensen.
Ms Follett: Minister Jensen.
MR MOORE: "To be Minister" Jensen - may I refer to him as "to be Minister" Jensen?
MR SPEAKER: I think that is inappropriate also.
Members interjected.
MR MOORE: Is that reflecting on a motion about to be carried in the Assembly? We need a new standing order for motions about to be carried in the Assembly.
The point that I really wish to raise is that to have debated that Bill immediately at that time would not have allowed any time for public discussion. On the other hand, on that particular matter, it was quite important, as far
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .