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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (11 May) . . Page.. 1533 ..

MR SPEAKER: You are not debating the issue, Mr Berry. You are debating the motion for the suspension of standing orders.

MR BERRY: Indeed I am, sir. This is one of the reasons why this matter needs to be fully debated, Mr Speaker-so that all of the issues can come out in the open about the web of deception that this Attorney-General has tried to create in relation to this matter. Mr Speaker, there needs to be a full and open debate about the reasons why this report cannot be quoted in this place. If it comes to the point where we cannot read from a report which is critical of a minister or another member in this place, then I am afraid democracy has gone down the gurgler.

Mr Humphries: That is not the point.

MR BERRY: If that is the course that you want to drive the Speaker to, then I am quite content to have the debate and have you all vote that the Speaker's ruling ought to be upheld in relation to this matter, because you people will wear it. If you are prepared to stop me from having that debate by refusing to allow me to have a suspension of standing orders in order that we can have it, you will fly in the face of a ruling or a comment that was made by the Speaker some time ago in relation to matters which I discussed outside this house. Mr Speaker said in relation to matters that I discussed outside this house in relation to the Speaker that there ought to have been a substantive motion in relation to the Speaker's ruling in this place. Indeed, I tried to move it and the Speaker refused me permission to move a motion when he eventually threw me out of this place.

Mr Speaker, you baited me into wanting one of these motions, that is, a motion of dissent from your ruling. That is why I want standing orders suspended-so that I can have a bit of justice in this process. If you people want to treat this place like a star chamber and just impose your political will on me through the Speaker, well, you are looking as though you are doing a pretty good job of it. I hope that the rest of the members in this place will support a motion for the suspension of standing orders in order that we can fully and openly debate the issue.

Joe Stalin could take a lesson or two from you people. That is the sort of strategy that he would adopt. Stifle debate. All I want is my chance to stand up here and state a case in relation to a ruling which I believe is unfair. I can tell you, and you know, that the Speaker criticised some things I said outside this place before because I had not taken up a substantive motion in this place. Quite to the contrary, in fact, I had, but he had refused to let me. Now all I want is my few minutes to be able to openly debate this issue, and I want those in this place who want the Speaker's ruling to be upheld in relation to comments on a committee report in this place to vote to uphold his particular rulings. You people will then be counted in relation to it. Those are my concluding remarks in relation to the suspension of standing orders.

MR MOORE (Minister for Health and Community Care) (6.18): Mr Berry says that what he wants is justice. In fact, had he actually listened to you instead of disregarding the chair at the time you were making a ruling, he would have heard you say, "Yes, Mr Berry, you are entitled to that. You are entitled to that under standing orders, but you must, for justice, do it as a substantive motion." Mr Berry is certainly entitled to do it, and nobody is debating that.

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