Page 1261 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 27 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
ruling; it is Mr Seselja and Mr Hanson for their failure to abide by and respect the principles outlined in continuing resolution 10 of this place. That is why the government will be moving the motion I have circulated in my name at the conclusion of this current debate.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (10.15): Mr Speaker, we will not be supporting this dissent from the ruling that you have brought down today. It is very clear that last week Mr Corbell came in and asked, Mr Speaker, for you to go away and consider this matter. In that process the Clerk has provided advice to you, and he has obviously done quite a lot of research, some extensive research, to put that together. That, no doubt, included looking at the Companion, the House of Representatives Practice, Odgers’ Senate Practice and so forth to be able to put this advice together.
It is very clear, and I also find it quite astounding, that Mr Seselja is trying to spin this into some sort of gagging of debate in this chamber when we have before us very clearly continuing resolution 10. It is extremely clear. This resolution was adopted by this place in March 2008. Obviously it was adopted because there was some concern in this chamber about people discussing issues that were before courts, and no doubt there was that decision that we needed to write down, to adopt, to be very clear about what we can and cannot comment on.
In this case it was, as we know, a case before the courts. Yes, my understanding is that there was a plea of guilty, but the sentence has yet to be determined. It is very clear that it is a clear breach. As we say:
(1) Cases in which proceedings are active in the courts shall not be referred to in any motion, debate or question.
(a) (i) Criminal proceedings are active when a charge has been made or a summons to appear has been issued.
(ii) Criminal proceedings cease to be active when they are concluded by verdict and sentence or discontinuance …
In this case, of course, we have not had a verdict, a sentence or discontinuance. And that is the matter at hand. Quite clearly, what was said did breach continuing resolution 10.
I find quite outrageous this conflict of interest charge as well. It is very clear that we have before us the Clerk’s advice to the Speaker. I have every respect for and confidence that the Clerk has done the research and has provided sound advice to the Speaker, which, of course, he has passed on to us this morning.
We will not be supporting this motion for dissent. Rather than moving dissent, it may well have been more appropriate for Mr Seselja to move to discontinue the continuing resolution 10 if he feels so strongly that it should not be part of the procedures here in this place. That is maybe where Mr Seselja should be going. But it absolutely does not stack up, this view of Mr Seselja’s, that this continuing resolution has not been
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video