Page 802 - Week 02 - Thursday, 12 February 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
There are two questions that I am not clear about. If there is still to be another Greens speaker—I would be happy to grant leave for that purpose—I would appreciate it if they could talk us through how we got to this position. Back in December and even this morning the position of the Labor Party was that the standing orders from the New South Wales upper house would be implemented. That has since changed, and we were told by Mr Corbell in his speech that that changed as a result of representations from the Greens, presumably subsequent to his statement earlier today. I would like someone to confirm that, because I think that is important.
What Mr Corbell is saying to us is that what was in the Greens-Labor agreement, what was set out in December, what was introduced in terms of the language Mr Corbell used this morning, changed after that period, but it just so happened that the change matched what he had accidentally presented to the Assembly. That is the message.
Mr Barr: There could be an X file on this.
MR SESELJA: Well, someone does need to explain this to us. What Mr Corbell is saying is that he did this inadvertently. He inadvertently presented something which was different to what had been agreed between the Greens and Labor. There presumably were no discussions prior to this. He then presented it, and the Greens said to him, “Well, actually, the one you presented is the one we like, so let’s change to that.” That is how we got to this point. That is quite an extraordinary process. When it comes to legislation, we see government amendments that the Greens would like to go off to a committee. What we have seen is a last-minute, apparently accidental, inadvertent, serendipitous arrangement—
Mr Corbell: Yes.
MR SESELJA: Mr Corbell is nodding, so he is confirming that this process was as I set it out. He is confirming that the process was that the government had a position until this morning. The minister accidentally presented the wrong position, he accidentally misled the Assembly, and the Greens said to him, “Thank you. We will take the accidental one, not the one you said.” That is what Mr Corbell is saying. This is quite comical. This is how the processes are playing out here, and that is quite extraordinary. I suppose we have to take people at their word—it is more usually the stuff up than the conspiracy—but this is quite extraordinary. I really would like to hear from some of the Greens, because we have heard Mr Corbell confirm it all across the chamber from his point of view.
We believe this amendment is the right one. We believe that this process generally is not the right one, but we will try and make it better through this amendment. We are disappointed that the Labor Party and the Greens all thought that the original proposal was a good idea until this morning, and it was only through this serendipitous action where Mr Corbell accidentally tabled something that he did not mean to that the Greens decided they liked that better. That is quite an extraordinary process. This is how things are going to operate in the new parliament.
Mr Corbell: Truth is stranger than fiction, Zed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .