Page 3402 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 17 September 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Duby: I withdraw, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: During the debate on the Gaming Machine (Amendment) Bill on Thursday, 15 August, I undertook to review a request I made to the Chief Minister that she withdraw an accusation and imputation against Mr Stevenson. Ms Follett had stated in debate that she thought it regrettable "that Mr Stevenson has sought to smear the industry in that way, to smear the Revenue Office by implication". I have reviewed the Hansard report of the proceedings and also reviewed the general comments made in the debate on that Bill.
Members may recall that earlier that afternoon Mr Berry was required to withdraw a statement that one member, and by implication others, was a "smear merchant". Mr Berry withdrew that statement. I believe that the distinction between the comments of Mr Berry and those of Ms Follett is fine but significant. Having reviewed the record, I have concluded that Ms Follett's comments do not warrant withdrawal. In effect, she claimed that Mr Stevenson had sullied or defamed the reputation of a club industry and those who administer it, not a member of the Assembly.
I take this opportunity to remind members of the need to observe the rule of relevance in debate. Having reviewed the comments made by all members in that debate, I note that at certain stages one member virtually called on other members to comment on wider issues relating to gambling in society and the recommendations of the Select Committee on the Establishment of a Casino. As a result, other members obviously felt the need to respond to those comments.
Mr Stevenson's comments in the debate did range very widely, dealing with matters in the States of Victoria and Western Australia, which had questionable relevance to the Bill before the Assembly. It must be noted, though, that, following points of order, Mr Stevenson did draw his remarks back to the need to ensure that there were tamper-proof gambling machines in the ACT.
I remind members that the relevancy rule is of fundamental importance in the conduct of proceedings of the Assembly. Without it, our proceedings could become a nonsense, and it is very likely that disorder could ensue. There are also occasions when the rule is relaxed, such as when the Assembly agrees to have a cognate debate or when the question before the Assembly is "That the Assembly do now adjourn".
Mr Berry: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My point of order is in relation to debate which is recorded in the proof copy of Hansard of 12 September at pages 52, 53 and 54. It began with a statement by Ms Maher that the Chief Minister had told a lie. She later on said that she withdrew "lie", and she then said that the Chief Minister had misled the house. A point of order was subsequently drawn to your attention by me.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .