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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (11 May) . . Page.. 1522 ..

Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, oh, no.

Mr Humphries: If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to finish my point of order. It was sent on the basis that it was to be provided to those members, and not beyond them, or to certain other people, and not beyond them. If Mr Berry repeats the comments on the floor of the Assembly, they can be reported beyond the Assembly, in the media and so on.

Mr Berry: That's right. So can anything else that I say.

Mr Humphries: But the comments that were made originally by Mr Hargreaves had to be withdrawn, on the basis that they offended against standing orders 54 and 55. I therefore ask that, if Mr Hargreaves' original comments were withdrawn, then Mr Berry's repeating of the comments must also logically be withdrawn.

Mr Hargreaves: Mr Speaker, I rise to speak to this point of order to correct something that the Attorney-General has said. What I actually did was withdraw-and I can quote from the Hansard as well-"any suggestion or implication there is any corruption or that there is any graft. However, I do not withdraw my comments in this dissenting report". I was not required to withdraw the comments from the report. In fact, Mr Speaker, to be quite honest, I was withdrawing, having been totally Gary-ed.

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, this is out of order.

Mr Hargreaves: I am saying this in all seriousness here. That is where that saying came from. This minister over here has drawn implications from what was said. He then stood up in this chamber and accused me of alleging that he perverted his duty, and he talked about this as an allegation of corruption. I made no such allegation of corruption. He has taken those implications. He stood up and defended it. I did not withdraw that. I withdrew an implication that this minister had drawn from it. He is the only one in this chamber who drew that implication, but I withdrew it on his behalf. So a relationship, Mr Speaker, between what I withdrew and what Mr Berry has said does not exist.

MR SPEAKER: Order! I would remind members of a resolution agreed to by the Assembly on 4 May 1995 headed "Exercise of Freedom of Speech". I would suggest you all refresh your memory about this. Just because we are in here, we do not have the right to say what we like, on any topic we like, or about anybody we like. Nevertheless, the matter has been raised. I am going to take the whole thing on notice.

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, can I strongly urge you not to do that, and I'll explain why. The Assembly is about to adjourn now for a period of about 10 days. If those comments remain on the record, and I have no doubt Mr Berry read them into the record for this very purpose, in the next 10 days those comments can be reported in the media without having to report also the qualification that they had been withdrawn as being unparliamentary.

My understanding of the law is that a report of the proceedings that have been withdrawn must be accompanied by a report that they have been withdrawn by the member concerned. This is a very important point. Mr Berry, I have no doubt, read the report into

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