Page 946 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 20 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
indication of what the atmospherics are about. My motivations were all about avoiding that accusation of political bias. Had I made those same comments outside the chair, people would have said, “The Labor Party is doing this, the Labor Party is doing that.” Because I did it in the chair, I am politically abusing the chair.
Mr Speaker, I contend that that is not so and I contend that this is really about those opposite being upset because they have been sprung in respect of the numbers of their misbehaviour. They have been found to have outnumbered us all by 10 to one in the interjections. Mr Speaker, you might say, “Hang on, your numbers are wrong.” Well, they are not that far out. But I have not just stopped at listing the numbers for the opposition. I have listed the fact that there were none from the crossbench and I have included in this tally two of my own, Mr Speaker, to make sure that people could not level an accusation at me that I am being particularly biased about this.
I have just indicated to the chamber that my motives were about indicating to those opposite that a 10 to one interjection list is not acceptable behaviour in this chamber. As an Assistant Speaker occupying that chair I was not going to put up with it. It was a simple advisory like that. There was no ruling. There was no singling out, saying, “Mr Hanson, you are gone.” There was nothing like that at all. I have advised the chamber of each and every tally. Members can then go away and cogitate where they stand in this regard.
I do not believe that I have exercised any political bias. I believe quite the opposite. The crossbench tried to introduce a new way of doing things into this chamber at the beginning of this Assembly. They tried to bring in new patterns of behaviour, new expectations, new standards. It is sad, I think, that those opposite are the ones who are not going along for the ride. We are all human and we all make mistakes. That is fine. The first time it is not going to be 100 per cent successful, but it could go a long way to being successful. But they do not.
This behaviour is not unique, Mr Speaker. The Canberra Times reported on it, and a reflection on every single question time that we have experienced over the last six months will reveal exactly the same stuff. Mr Speaker, in your position you are entitled to make your judgements. In fact, you are charged with making your judgements the best that you can. I respect that and I support you in every decision you have made. In fact, I have stood in this place and supported every decision you have made.
But each one of us has a different attitude—some slightly different, some of them very, very different—to what should and should not go on by way of standard in this chamber. In this chamber there is a standard. I do not believe I have stepped over the line but I believe that those opposite have, Mr Speaker.
I would ask those members to consider again the constant breaches of standing order 37 that states that order shall be maintained in the Assembly and standing order 39, which states that when a member is speaking no other member may converse or make any noise or disturbance to interrupt the member.
Their interjections are deliberate and determined. They are aimed at disrupting the member. Standing order 61 states:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video