Page 3199 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 24 August 2005

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

---

censure motion last week, I said the whole purpose of what the Chief Minister had done was to nobble the coroner, so that when the decision came down, whatever the decision was: “We can all throw up our hands and say, ‘It is tainted. We said there was a bias back then. We got it right then, and we are right now.’” I believe that has been the whole purpose of this. We have a Chief Minister who can, if he wishes, say that he now has not one but two sets of legal advice that said he was correct. But he refuses to share that legal advice. He says, “I will not do it.” You have to ask why he would not do it, because—

Motion (by Mr Stanhope) proposed:

That the question be now put.

MR SMYTH: Yes, we get to the important bit and you move the gag. It is so typical of you. You said, “Honest, open and transparent,” and you throw the gag in every time.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Question put:

That Mr Stanhope’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Question put:

That the motion, as amended, be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

---

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