Page 3967 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 25 August 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
directed at Mrs Dunne—a sectarian attack—because Mrs Dunne dares to speak and happens to be a Catholic. What an outrageous thing to say—that somehow it is fair game. According to Ms Gallagher, it is fair game to go after and impugn Mrs Dunne’s motives because of her religious affiliation, because of—
Ms Gallagher: After getting a lecture from her about my motives.
MR SESELJA: It is extraordinary. She does not want to fight it on its merits, does not want to defend the way she has handled this. Has she handled it well? No. She will descend into an unfounded sectarian attack. It follows on from the Chief Minister’s extraordinary, unparliamentary attacks on Mr Hanson. You always know you have hit a nerve when you get those kinds of disgraceful attacks. I would just draw people’s attention to those words from Ms Gallagher. To effectively attack Mrs Dunne because of her religion, because of her religious background, is disgraceful. I do not think it would be deemed acceptable by Ms Gallagher if someone was attacked for any other reason, for any other similar reason. It is disgraceful.
Ms Gallagher: So you did not hear Vicki’s attacks on me now? They are all right, are they, Zed? They are all right?
MR SESELJA: When we go into substance—if you do not like being attacked because of your record, then perhaps you are in the wrong job, Katy.
Ms Gallagher: No. She attacked me over my ideological beliefs, Zed.
MR SESELJA: No; she went you for your record.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Ms Gallagher, please stop interjecting.
MR SESELJA: She went you for your record and you went for a religious attack. That is what we saw. You know you cannot win the argument on its merits when you descend to those kinds of attacks.
The problem with this amendment and the combination of the two proposed amendments from Ms Bresnan and Ms Gallagher is that it is again all about accepting the government’s line. The government is again saying to us as an Assembly, “Trust me.”
You do need to question what is the Greens’ motivation here in this place if, regardless of what happens, they continue to always accept the word of the minister, accept the word of this government, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, they will accept whatever they are fed. This is the minister who said before the election that all the plans were on the table. And they were not. On this very issue, they were not. When we tried to get the Auditor-General to look at it, the Greens and the Labor Party did not want it. It has now fallen over in a heap. They have got this advice and we are saying, “Put it on the table.” The Greens and the Labor Party again are saying, “No; we do not need information. We do not need openness. We do not need accountability.”
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video