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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (11 May) . . Page.. 1534 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

The criticism that is being made of Mr Humphries is a criticism that requires a substantive motion. That is really what this debate is about. We are used to hearing Mr Berry use this sort of tactic, of misusing standing orders, to try to get around that. He has the standing orders available to him, so he has the prerogative of questioning Mr Humphries in the way he says he wishes to. This is not the way to do it. This is simply to dissent from the Speaker's ruling, to say that the Speaker's ruling is wrong. In this case it is quite clear that the Speaker's ruling is entirely appropriate.

Mr Berry: It is not.

MR MOORE: Mr Berry, if you would listen to the Speaker-

Mr Berry: That is the argument. You will not let us have the argument about that.

MR MOORE: It was quite clear from your opening comments in this debate about the suspension of standing orders, but you did not listen to what the Speaker said because you wandered out of the chamber to talk to other people, probably for very good reasons. You missed what the Speaker said. What the Speaker said was: "Mr Berry, if you wish to raise this matter you must do it as a substantive motion."

Mr Berry: I heard him say that.

MR MOORE: Therefore, what you must do now is withdraw the allegation that you have made in an inappropriate manner. You are able to do it, but you must do it on a substantive motion. That has been the practice in this chamber since you have been here, Mr Berry, from day one for 11 years. You know it and you simply flout the standing orders, and you get more and more flagrant about it.

Mr Berry: Is that unparliamentary?

MR SPEAKER: That is not unparliamentary.

MR MOORE: You do it through question time, and you do it very regularly. I should not say you flout them. You test them to the extreme. I withdraw the word "flout". You test them to the extreme, Mr Berry, and you know it. It is a type of game that you play to test the Speaker.

The Speaker has been extraordinarily fair in this particular case. He has said to you, "Yes, you may proceed with this, Mr Berry, according to standing orders." I will tell you why he has been extraordinarily fair. The Speaker had the prerogative of using standing order 202 (e). I called on him to use standing order 202 (e) and he said, "No, I will not do that. Instead I will make it very clear to Mr Berry that he has a chance." Mr Berry, he has given you chance after chance after chance, as he does almost every question time and as he has done again here.

Mr Berry, it is time for us to vote against this silly motion for the suspension of standing orders and to give you the prerogative, as you have, to put this as a substantive motion. But first, Mr Berry, you must withdraw in the circumstances that you have used the standing orders.

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