Page 4940 - Week 17 - Tuesday, 11 December 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: I take a point of order. I do not care much about what Mr Jensen thinks of the way that I approach things, but I object to the record showing that there is an acceptance from the Opposition that the matter was put before the chamber in a frivolous way. It certainly was not, and Mr Jensen should be asked not to pursue that line.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Berry, I, personally, found some of your comments hilarious. I am sure other members did and I am sure that was the way you intended them. I thought you intended them that way and therefore - - -
Mr Berry: Well, Mr Speaker, that is the difficulty.
MR SPEAKER: Assuming then that you were serious, I could ask you to withdraw the comment about Mr Jensen being led round on a leash. That was taken as an hilarious comment. I think you are wasting the time of the Assembly. Please proceed, Mr Jensen.
MR JENSEN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is quite clear that in this matter Mr Berry wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to make jokes, but he is not prepared to accept people referring to the way in which he makes them. I think the MPI that has been brought on today by the Opposition is, quite clearly, sheer opportunism and grandstanding. It is not an attempt to engage in serious debate. That clearly is the way Mr Berry has approached this today; it is not serious debate at all. If they were fair dinkum about this matter, Mr Speaker, they would have brought forward a substantive motion.
Mr Connolly: We did, and you denied us leave, you dill.
Ms Follett: You denied us leave.
MR JENSEN: No. You are clearly implying that the motion relates to Mr Speaker. The whole tone of Mr Berry's discussions during the debate was an imputation against the ability of your ruling, Mr Speaker. Mr Berry was not prepared to bring forward a substantive motion in relation to your ruling. It was a motion in relation to the performance of the Government, not a motion in relation to your particular ruling. Therefore, Mr Speaker, the way that Mr Berry is seeking to approach this is, once again, quite hypocritical. They are seeking, once again, to raise the issue outside the normal processes within the standing orders for dealing with such matters. If they had a problem with your ruling, they should have moved accordingly; but they did not do that.
They sought, during a long period of points of order, to denigrate the ruling that you made, and that was most unfortunate, Mr Speaker. In fact the Opposition have sought, once again, to take power without real responsibility for their action. Once again we see from across the chamber rhetoric without reality, something
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .