Page 1523 - Week 04 - Thursday, 25 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Seselja: It does. Mr Speaker, on the point of order, I refer you to your rulings in relation particularly to many of Mr Hargreaves’s questions—the ones that have not been a total joke and ruled out of order. On a number of occasions you have given him significant latitude in the sups. This clearly does relate to the Labor Club Group sale. It is, therefore, in order.
MR SPEAKER: Whilst I do think that the original focus of the question was clearly on taxation, I think it is, given the Treasurer’s responsibilities, within the scope for the Treasurer to answer the question of whether she believes she has any conflicts of interest in her office.
MS GALLAGHER: No, I do not believe I have any conflicts of interest in my office.
MR SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mrs Dunne?
MRS DUNNE: I thank the minister for answering the second part of the question. Minister, are you or any of your staff on the ALP’s administration committee or on the board of the Canberra Labor club?
Mr Corbell: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, this question is about the minister’s role in the Australian Labor Party or the role of the minister’s staff in the Australian Labor Party. You cannot ask the minister that and be within the confines of the minister’s portfolio responsibilities.
Mr Smyth: On the point of order, Mr Speaker, it is in relation to the Gambling and Racing Commission’s report, and this is a question that was asked of Minister Barr earlier in the week, and he had no problems answering it.
Mr Corbell: Mr Speaker, this is not the same question that was asked earlier this week; the question was specifically about the minister’s personal affairs. It is not about her portfolio responsibilities. It is out of order.
Mr Seselja: Mr Speaker, on the point of order, you just ruled the last question in order. The minister answered only the second part. Mrs Dunne has repeated the first part of the question, and we would ask the minister to answer.
MR SPEAKER: I think consistent with the ruling I made with regard to the question to Mr Barr earlier in the week, where a minister has portfolio responsibility, I believe it is in order to explore whether there is a conflict of interest, and that includes establishing the relationships of staff of the member.
Mr Stanhope: That’s bulldust.
Mr Corbell: On your ruling, Mr Speaker—
Mr Hanson: Did you say that’s bullshit, the Speaker’s ruling?
MR SPEAKER: Order, members! It is my practice in this place that I am prepared to have some discussion without it necessarily being full-blown dissent. I think I have
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video