Page 2078 - Week 06 - Thursday, 7 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
there would be papers. One presumes there would be statements from staff, that there might even be statutory declarations, but we are not to have the benefit of any of that. We are not to have the comfort of any evidence or any suggestion that the Liberal Party has taken seriously in any way, to any degree the need to fully and thoroughly investigate this odious episode.
The Leader of the Opposition today leaves as many questions unanswered as he answered by expressing his inability to table any documents because there are no documents that he has that actually show or prove in any way that he did undertake a serious inquiry into this matter.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (12.26): As always, on serious issues, when the Chief Minister has nothing of substance to say he attacks the person. He says that Mr Seselja has not said anything. Well, that is not true. Mr Hanson put out a statement on the very first day that confirmed that Mr Seselja and Mr Hanson were against this sort of activity. From day one they have said that.
The charge is that Mr Seselja did not do an interview that day. Well, he was not in Canberra that day. I will remind people that it was the school holidays. He was away. It is impossible to do something when you are not in town. The Chief Minister can weave whatever he wants, but the reality is that Mr Seselja has tabled documents, as requested.
It is interesting that last evening the Deputy Chief Minister called on Mr Seselja to inform this Assembly before the end of the sitting period, yet this morning that has changed and suddenly it is a motion. Perhaps the Labor Party needs to get their act together on this.
At the heart of this is whether anybody in this place condones the use of sexist, racist, homophobic vilification anywhere, but specifically on internet posts or any other modern electronic medium. I think the amendment, as presented, is something that everyone in this place could sign up to. I do not believe anybody here ever does or ever would condone the use of sexist, racist, homophobic vilification in any forum.
The second part of the amendment suggests that we commit that all parties work together to ensure that members, staff and party members do not engage in the use of such actions in any medium. I am aware of websites and other sites, electronic sites, out there that have vilified John Howard, Brendan Nelson, Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop. There are some people who have a different standard and they do different things. It is not something I condone; it is not something that I agree with. Perhaps the Attorney-General, given his control or what limited control we have over electronic communications, can come up with a way forward. But we can start with members of this place and our staff and work with our parties to ensure that no-one engages in the use of such actions in any medium. Indeed, I think we will all undertake to abide by the terms of paragraph (3) of Mr Seselja’s amendment and apply appropriate disciplinary action against anyone identified as conducting any such activities.
It is important to continue the steps we have made in this country, particularly in this territory, to get rid of sexist, racist or homophobic activities. That process should not
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .