Page 2433 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 1 July 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
investigation that takes place. Once again, I am concerned that Mr Stefaniak this morning has already made some admission, in saying that he has had to apologise to his committee, and he apologised again this morning. I think it is important that the committee be established so that it can look into this matter.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.51): I think we are seeing a clear pattern here from a government that has clearly been on the back foot for some time. This is its attempt to smear Mr Stefaniak with respect to totally unfounded allegations. In particular, we are seeing a pattern. First, Ms Gallagher complained about being quoted in a public forum and raised an issue of privilege. Second, I understand that this morning Ms Porter raised a matter of privilege, and of course that was rejected. Now, third time lucky, we have hit the jackpot and Mr Corbell has been able to move his motion. This is indicative of a government and a Labor Party in this place that simply wants to use its majority to—
Mr Gentleman: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. I am concerned that in Mr Seselja’s speech there was a reflection on you as the Speaker in your decision.
MR SPEAKER: I missed it. I will review the Hansard. If I can see anything, I will come back to it.
MR SESELJA: It is not a reflection on the Speaker. Mr Speaker, we have a government and a Labor Party in this place which is desperate to deflect attention from its own performance, which is desperate to try and somehow find fault in what clearly was a procedural matter. What Mr Corbell is essentially saying to us is that committee chairs should never, ever write letters, that they should always get formal resolutions—
Ms Porter: No, not saying that.
MR SESELJA: In fact, he is. He is saying that because Mr Stefaniak did not have a formal resolution—and, by the way, how did Mr Corbell know, because I did not know whether there was a formal resolution or not? That is another matter that we have to look at here. Mr Corbell, in bringing this forward and saying that documents were requested of him without a formal resolution of this committee, is apparently aware of the internal goings-on of that committee in order to know that it was never done.
Mr Corbell: Mr Stefaniak refused to confirm that there were.
MR SESELJA: He refused to confirm it? So where did you get your confirmation from, Mr Corbell, to be so certain as to establish this committee? Could it be the case that another member of this committee spoke to you about the internal goings-on? That is the only way that you could know. So what we have here is Mr Corbell actually getting information in an inappropriate way, it would seem, in order to try and use it against my colleague Mr Stefaniak. This is a stunt; this should be seen for what it is.
It is a desperate Labor Party that is now trying to have arguments on technical points about whether or not Mr Corbell was requested by Mr Stefaniak and whether or not he
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .