Page 1621 - Week 04 - Thursday, 7 April 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
interjections—far more, I would say, controversial and objectionable—and Mr Coe was simply responding to those. But it is Mr Coe that you cracked down on in this place and I think that is inconsistent. I think that you should either withdraw your warning to Mr Coe or you should apply it consistently and warn Mr Stanhope.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Planning, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation and Minister for Gaming and Racing) (5.34): Mr Assistant Speaker, you are discharging your responsibilities in the chair in a most impartial manner. As I go to the points I have been raising, the issuing of a warning is a courtesy that the occupant of that position extends to members in this place. The occupant of the Speaker’s chair is perfectly entitled—
Members interjecting—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Order, members! You were heard in silence. Mr Barr.
MR BARR: The occupant of the Speaker’s chair is perfectly entitled to move straight to a naming if that person believes that the behaviour of a member warrants such an action. Then we can formally have a ruling from which to dissent. This is possibly the most ridiculous conversation we have had in this chamber this week. I say “possibly”. We do not know what is still to come. In my view, you have not made an actual ruling, Mr Assistant Speaker. You have simply issued a warning to a member. The Liberal Party do not like the fact that one of theirs has been issued with a warning—a courtesy that you have extended that the behaviour of that member was approaching the point of formally being named. That, I think, is entirely appropriate and a very generous courtesy that you extend in your role as Assistant Speaker—
Mr Hanson interjecting—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Order, Mr Hanson, please!
MR BARR: in this place. In fact, I think the guidance that you provide in terms of that role and being clear and even-handed to all members in this place ensures the orderly functioning of the Assembly. Now, it is 25 to six. I know members would like to discuss the master planning process. I know I have been waiting all day to deliver a speech, Mr Assistant Speaker. I know the Greens’ planning spokesperson is interested in contributing to this debate. I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition, if he could bring himself just for a moment to focus on his shadow portfolio responsibilities rather than the theatrics of this place, might also have a contribution. We have 24 minutes to go before the adjournment, Mr Assistant Speaker, and there is no basis on which to support Mr Hanson’s motion. Accordingly, the government will not.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (5.36): Mr Assistant Speaker, you must be very grateful for that show of loyalty from Mr Barr in seeking to defend your ruling. I think it is unfortunate that Mr Barr focused as he did on his desire to speak on planning and on a technicality rather than dealing with the substance of the motion before the Assembly right now. The substance of the motion is very clear. The reason that Mr Hanson has moved it is that it was very clear that there was one main protagonist there who was not being brought to order—and that was the Chief
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video