Page 3199 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 16 August 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Opposition members interjecting—
Mr Hargreaves: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, Mr Seselja’s initial speech was heard in silence. I believe that this is a sufficiently serious debate that those opposite ought to give their leader the credit of having the entire debate heard in silence. I am getting a bit sick of the interjections and the catcalling across the chamber. I ask you to bring them to order.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Hargreaves. I think that is a fair point. Mr Seselja was heard in silence. Let us try and conduct this whole debate in the same manner. Mr Corbell, you have the floor.
MR CORBELL: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Any past association that you have had with that organisation is not relevant in your current role. Your role as Speaker is to uphold the dignity of this place, to fairly and impartially oversight the debates of this place and to ensure the proper administration of the Assembly.
There is nothing in what you have said which leads the government to believe that you are unable to continue in that role and to perform those functions. That is why, in the amendment that the government are moving this morning, we express our ongoing confidence in your ability to perform your duties fairly and impartially.
But we also say to you, Mr Speaker, that the comments you made on ABC radio on 14 July were unwise. They were unwise because they have clearly created the perception that you perhaps condoned the actions of an unlawful protest. Perception is important, and it is a matter that we believe you should have close regard to. I think many in the community would have reflected on what would have been the reaction of yourself or other members of the Greens in other circumstances—if, say, the protest involved the storming of a climate change academic at the ANU and the destruction of their property and research. I think such actions would have been rightly condemned by all law-abiding citizens. And I think that is the quandary you have placed yourself in, Mr Speaker, in that perhaps unlawful actions which are contrary to your political beliefs would be perceived differently and responded to differently from actions which are consistent with your political beliefs.
That is why it is very important that all members in this place uphold the principle of the rule of law—that laws are made to govern us all and that they are obliged to be upheld by all. Further, I think it is very important that comments are made in such a manner as to not allow the perception to be created that there is support for unlawful or illegal action by any member of this place.
Are these comments worthy of a motion of no confidence? Not in the government’s view. There is nothing to suggest that you, as the Speaker, cannot continue to perform your duties fairly and impartially as a member of this place. But in the cut and thrust of political debate, talkback radio and engagement with the media, were the comments wise? No, they were not. And I think it is important that the Assembly reflects on that.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video