Page 3207 - Week 11 - Thursday, 13 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
rule on points of order relating to standing order 200 and Bills after I have had the opportunity to consider the Bills rather than at the time the point of order was taken. The issues raised by standing order 200 are often complex and it is difficult for the Speaker to rule quickly on what are often lengthy legislative proposals. I believe this practice ensures proper consideration of the points of order taken, together with providing all members with an opportunity to propose legislation for consideration.
MR COLLAERY (Attorney-General) (11.17): It must be clear to the house that I have had no conversations with the Speaker as alleged by Mrs Grassby by interjection, when she said, "They have done something". I had no prior notice that the Speaker was going to produce this finding.
Mr Speaker, pursuant to standing order 170, I move:
That the Human Rights Bill 1990 be withdrawn.
MR MOORE (11.17): Mr Speaker, it is a sad day when we see Mr Collaery of all people moving to remove a Bill on human rights. Had Mr Collaery been open-minded and broad-minded about this issue, he could well have gone to Labor and said, "Look, you have done a tremendous amount of work on this human rights Bill and I also have an interest. We could have a bipartisan approach to this". He could have said, "I would be prepared to introduce this Bill with some modifications". It could have been presented along these lines. But no; instead of doing that, Mr Collaery has delayed the introduction of a human rights Bill into this Assembly by, what is it, Mr Collaery, six months - something along those lines. What we will actually see is the introduction by Mr Collaery at some time of a Bill which, in fact, will be very similar to the Bill that was tabled yesterday. I think that relying so heavily on this and the self-government Act is very questionable.
I am not a lawyer myself, Mr Speaker; however, I am capable of reading about Bills whose object or effect is to dispose of public money, and I accept that there is a problem with this. This particular issue ties up every single issue that the Opposition wishes to raise and the result of it will be to ensure that private members' business almost becomes redundant. This is what this Assembly is doing, and the reason the Government members are not particularly worried about it is twofold. First of all, they are presently in government and, secondly, they are unlikely ever to be in opposition because they are unlikely ever to be re-elected. So the impact on them is going to be very slim, with the exception of, perhaps, Mr Kaine, if he does not decide to retire first. I do not mean to pre-empt anything.
Mr Kaine: I am not planning to retire for 10 years. I am going to be Chief Minister in 10 years' time.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .