Page 2349 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 16 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr De Domenico, I have repeatedly warned you to stop interjecting. I would ask you to desist, please.
Mr Berry: Madam Speaker, he did impute that Mr Lamont was not telling the truth.
Mr De Domenico: I did no such thing.
Mr Berry: You said, "Tell the whole truth".
Mr De Domenico: That is right. That is what I said - "Tell the whole truth". I did not impute anything.
MADAM SPEAKER: I am sorry, Mr Berry; I did not hear that interjection. Mr De Domenico, I will ask you to desist from interjecting, particularly from making interjections of that nature. Mr Lamont, would you continue, please.
MR LAMONT: I will conclude on this point in my remaining five minutes. On 26 August, the next day, Dr Hewson appeared to strengthen his stand.
Mr Humphries: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I again appeal to you on the question of the relevance of the references to Dr Hewson. The motion before the Assembly deals only with the ACT Liberals, not with Dr Hewson. There is no way that reference to Dr Hewson's views on York Park can be of any - - -
Mr Connolly: You just quoted him for 10 minutes.
Mr Humphries: Because you quoted him at us. There is no way that it can be considered relevant to a debate about the ACT Liberal Party's position on York Park.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Humphries, I did allow Mr Kaine to continue to talk about Dr Hewson, and I believe that I should allow Mr Lamont to continue to talk about Dr Hewson. Your point is understood, Mr Humphries. We are indeed talking about the ACT and I will listen further and wait for the relevance of those comments to the ACT.
MR LAMONT: Madam Speaker, the precise relevance will become apparent very quickly and it will embarrass the people on the other side. I can understand why they do not wish us to continue. I quote the Canberra Times again:
Yesterday, Dr Hewson appeared to strengthen his stand, saying it would be fought on all fronts and that his opposition should not be read as anti-Canberra.
"I don't think you should see a building like that in relation to the circumstances in Canberra," he said. "Canberra hasn't been hit as hard as the rest of Australia, that is true, but you've got to assess a building like that on its merits and DFAT does not deserve that building.".
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .