Page 944 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 20 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
but Mr Seselja still interjected during question time—the implication being that you did nothing about it and you should have. That is a reflection upon your occupation of the chair. It is disorderly and Mr Hargreaves should be required to withdraw.
MR HARGREAVES: On the point of order, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: On the point of order, Mr Hargreaves.
MR HARGREAVES: Yes, thanks very much, Mr Speaker. I was not reflecting on your ruling around Mr Seselja’s warning, nor anything else. I was reflecting, in fact, on Mr Seselja’s contemptuous attitude towards your position to the chair by his continuing with this behaviour. How you judge the next step, Mr Speaker, is left up to you, and I respect that. I do not think that Mrs Dunne has a case.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Hargreaves. I think this is a fine line and at this stage there is no point of order. But, Mr Hargreaves, I would remind you of the point Mrs Dunne just made.
MR HARGREAVES: Thanks very much, Mr Speaker. I would have thought that the Canberra Times indicated to those opposite that there is this pattern of behaviour of constant abuse and interjection across the chamber and my indicating that out of 165, Mr Hanson was responsible for 67 of them, again, could constitute telling people that they are getting close to it.
Mr Speaker, if I was to occupy the chair and Mr Hanson was to indulge in that behaviour and I was to invoke standing order 203, they would be the first to squeal because they were not told, they were not given any notice. Had I promptly said to somebody, “I invoke standing order 203,” you might have had a case about being political, but I did not. There is nothing political about this.
This is about the pattern of behaviour that an occupant of the chair has indicated to the chamber is not acceptable—and only when I occupy that chair. But I have to tally it at some point. Mr Speaker, had I done it tomorrow, it would have been twice, and there would have been the opportunity then to tell it. I have indicated today what those numbers were. Nothing more and nothing less. Now that Mr Hanson has raised the issue, the motivation for the tally is there. It is because I do not find the pattern of behaviour acceptable.
Mr Speaker, those opposite accuse me of a particular type of behaviour. I have never been censured in this place. Never. Mr Smyth has. I have never had standing order 203 invoked for what I have done in this chamber. Mr Hanson has and Mrs Dunne has. Mr Speaker, never in 14 years have I had standing order 203 invoked.
When we talk about patterns of behaviour, Mr Hanson is really not on solid ground to talk about that. The language that he has used to the crossbench, the bullying nature of his behaviour towards the crossbench, towards the Chief Minister and to Ms Burch is just not acceptable. It is not acceptable in this place. He is in no position to talk to me about misbehaviour.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video