Page 5268 - Week 12 - Thursday, 28 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
conducting themselves in debates. I do not think this particular case warrants my intervention.
MR CORBELL: Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. Mrs Dunne should reflect on her own point of order in relation to her own conduct in this place from time to time. It is a completely hypocritical approach on the part of the Liberal Party. Here they are, the champions of advertising campaign reform. “This must be done. There must be this process.”
The Assembly supports that legislation. The government seeks to implement that legislation. And what does Mr Seselja do? He wrecks it. He makes it unworkable. He makes his own legislation a joke. That is what he has done.
There is no conflict of interest in relation to Mr Hull, and I would like to hear the argument about how there is. I would like to hear the argument about how there is a conflict of interest. Mr Hull does not own the newspaper. He receives no financial benefit whether the Canberra Times receives advertising activity or does not. I am sure the Canberra Times can afford to pay Mr Hull regardless of whether or not they receive any advertising revenue from the ACT government. I am sure they will continue to pay him probably the quite measly sum that he receives from the Canberra Times for providing the 500-odd words every week.
It is an absurd argument. It is an argument really beneath Mr Seselja, and it just shows that he is a wrecker. He is not interested in a constructive approach in this place. He is not even interested in making his own legislation work.
This motion deserves to be supported today. The government wants to get on with the business of implementing an act passed by this place, and the only people who are stopping it are the Liberal Party.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (11.56): That was an interesting presentation from Mr Corbell and it is like everything that Mr Corbell says in this place. You have got to take it with a grain of salt. Remember, of course, he is the only member to be found guilty by the Assembly of persistently and wilfully misleading the Assembly. And he has done so again today. He made this confection where he said—
Mr Corbell: On a point of order, Mr Smyth knows that, if he wants to accuse a member of misleading this place, he must do so by substantive motion. I would ask you to direct him to withdraw the comment.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): Mr Smyth, I think it would be appropriate for you to withdraw.
MR SMYTH: I withdraw. But what he says is not correct. He says that Mr Seselja somehow avoided getting the information from the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister initially refused to give it up. Then there were all sorts of conditions. Mr Corbell has not told the Assembly this, has he? No, he forgot those parts. He confects the story. He confects the scene. He forgets to tell the full truth.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video