Page 1502 - Week 04 - Thursday, 25 March 2010

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

---

Ms Gallagher as a result. No matter what members in this place say, that cloud will remain for as long as this matter is unresolved.

This matter could have been resolved 20 minutes ago. Ms Bresnan said, on behalf of the Greens, that they would not support this motion, that there was no conflict of interest. Ms Bresnan said there was no conflict of interest and now the Greens have weakened, they have crumbled, and they are trying to find some other way through this.

Mr Speaker, we will not support this process. There is no role for the ethics adviser in this process, unless members themselves individually seek that advice. Members cannot be compelled by this place to seek advice from the ethics adviser. They cannot be compelled to do so. There is no conflict of interest. The self-government act and the standing orders themselves allow only the Assembly to determine whether or not there is a conflict of interest. Ms Bresnan is on the record as saying that the Greens do not believe there is a conflict of interest. We should have simply voted on the matter and got on with the business of the day. We now have this absurd nether world that we are entering into, courtesy of the Greens and the Liberal Party, and the Labor Party and the government will have no part in it.

Ms Hunter: I move that the debate be adjourned.

MR SPEAKER: Ms Hunter, you have already spoken. Perhaps someone else could move the adjournment.

Motion (by Ms Le Couteur) proposed:

That debate be adjourned.

Question put.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Debate adjourned to the next sitting.

Mr Smyth, pursuant to standing order 128, fixed the next day of sitting for the moving of notice No 1, Assembly business.

---

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