Page 4206 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 23 October 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


MR BERRY: The move to suspend standing orders is, I suspect, merely a stunt, because it has been made clear by the failed former Minister that he is not prepared to consult with the Government about disruption of the business of this house.

Mr Collaery: You were about to adjourn.

Ms Maher: You were expecting to stay here until 6 o'clock.

Ms Follett: Not you, Ms Maher. You can go early, as usual.

Ms Maher: I spend more time here than you, thank you, Ms Follett.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr Wood: You collapsed the debate on the planning legislation.

MR BERRY: Nobody wants to talk about the planning legislation.

Mr Collaery: You tried to con us into debating it before we had a Territory Plan.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Collaery, order! We do not want this to degenerate into a fight across the chamber over nothing. We are debating a motion as to whether we suspend standing orders. Let us stick to the point. Continue, Mr Berry.

MR BERRY: As I said, the issue is that the Government has not been consulted on this score. Mr Humphries attempted to do the very same thing earlier today. He failed in his move then. He has not since approached the Government to let us know that he would again be seeking leave to suspend standing orders, which I think demonstrates a distinct lack of courage on the part of the failed former Minister. Indeed, it shows that he is prepared to ignore the customs and practices which are usually observed when one seeks to suspend standing orders.

Indeed, Mr Humphries would be, I suspect, the first to complain if he were not given notice about a ministerial statement on a particular matter. Of course, the Government provides that sort of information without complaint. I think Mr Humphries should lay on the table the matter that he has, in order that we can fit it into the day's business. He has the opportunity to raise such matters in private members' business, and he refuses to do so. I suspect that it is because he cannot obtain the acquiescence of his colleagues because of the nature of the matter which is proposed in this instance but - - -

Mr Jensen: So, you know about it now.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .