Page 3332 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (12.15): There are a couple of things that I need to deal with, particularly in relation to the amendment. With respect to Ms Hunter’s amendment, Mr Smyth has outlined some of the significant problems with it. With respect to what it fails to do—and this is what I cannot quite fathom as to why the Greens would want to take the position—this is the part that they do not agree with. There are a number of parts they do not agree with, but they do not agree with this part of the motion, which states:
(5) calls on all ministers of the ACT Government to make full and frank disclosures of any involvement they, their staff or their representatives may have had in influencing the decision making process of the Labor Club board.
What is it about full disclosure that the Greens are opposed to? I do not quite understand why they would take this approach with respect to calling for full and frank disclosure, part of which we tried to do in question time yesterday and we were stifled at every turn by the government. Indeed, the Greens were stifled in asking their questions, yet they seemed to be happy to be stifled. They do not want to then, in response to that—
Mr Corbell: On a point of order, Mr Speaker—
MR SESELJA: Can we stop the clock, Mr Speaker?
MR SPEAKER: Stop the clock, Clerk.
Mr Corbell: I think Mr Seselja is reflecting on a decision of the chair. There was no stifling of questions. You ruled those questions out of order because they were inconsistent with the standing orders.
Mr Hanson: You gave Mr Stanhope the opportunity to answer—
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Corbell has the floor.
Mr Corbell: For Mr Seselja to assert that those questions were stifled is a reflection on you, Mr Speaker, and a reflection on your decision, and you should ask Mr Seselja to withdraw that suggestion.
MR SESELJA: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: Mr Stanhope was given the opportunity. He was given the opportunity by you in the chamber to actually answer the question, and he chose not to. So the Greens were stifled by the Chief Minister refusing. There is no reflection on the chair in talking about the government seeking to hide behind standing orders at every opportunity.
Mr Corbell: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: Mr Seselja was making specific reference to Ms Hunter’s question, and Ms Hunter’s question was ruled out of order by you following a point of order from the floor. To suggest that Ms Hunter’s questioning was stifled is a complete reflection on the chair. If, every time there is a question ruled out of order, a member in this place can assert that they were stifled
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .