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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 6 Hansard (22 June) . . Page.. 1609 ..

Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, the difficulty is that Mr Kaine is constantly referring to me, that he is constantly dealing with these issues and misrepresenting me - - -

MR SPEAKER: Being provocative is the word.

Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, you have constantly ruled - - -

MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, is Mr Moore taking a point of order or is he not?

MR SPEAKER: Order! Order!

Mr Moore: I am in the middle of a point of order, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Moore has a point of order.

Mr Moore: Thank you. Mr Speaker, you have set the precedent before that, where the member speaking constantly refers to another member, in the normal to and fro of the debate there will be interjections. That is what I am referring to.

MR SPEAKER: It is provocative.

Mr Moore: When he is provoking, Mr Speaker, that is likely to happen.

MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Do you have a point of order, Mr Corbell?

Mr Corbell: Yes, I do, Mr Speaker. Mr Moore is consistently and persistently taking frivolous points of order. Further, Mr Speaker, he is consistently and persistently ignoring your ruling about interjections in this debate. He has done it on half a dozen occasions while Mr Kaine has been speaking. You made it very clear that you would not tolerate any interjections. I would ask you, Mr Speaker, not to allow Mr Moore to do that again.

Mr Moore: Hypocrisy, Simon Corbell.

Mr Corbell: He just did it again, Mr Speaker.

MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, I will merely summarise briefly and stop aggravating Mr Moore. I can see that it is a matter of some aggravation to him. Mr Speaker, the point that I am trying to make is that we have before us a very serious matter. It is the most serious matter that can come before a legislature. Precedent in this house has established that, once such a motion is tabled, the house will adjourn. There is no justification for not following that precedent; indeed, not to follow the precedent would put this house in a situation where it is attempting to deal with significant government business which it ought not to deal with, given that there could be a new Chief Minister one week from today. I submit, Mr Speaker, that the motion put by the Leader of the Opposition is most proper and it would be remiss of this house to reject this motion; in fact, it would be improper for the house to reject this motion. I support it and I submit that every member of this place should support Mr Stanhope's proposals.

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