Page 1262 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 27 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
breached. You simply did not address your remarks this morning to the continuing resolution 10. As I said, we will not in any way be supporting the dissent.
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (10.19): Mr Speaker, I rise to talk about this very commendable action from Mr Seselja, but I am somewhat confused. I am confused as to why there is such a hoo-ha about the comments that were made last week by me and Mr Seselja.
All of us spoke to a motion that was put before this place on 16 August which moved a want of confidence in you, Mr Speaker, relating to your comments about the CSIRO, when an incident that occurred at the CSIRO had led to charges being laid against two members on 12 August. The sub judice rules that Mr Corbell outlined very clearly to us applied equally on 16 August last year and last week. It seems that when Mr Seselja and I spoke last week, that was not in accordance with continuing resolution 10—it was a breach of that and there was some terrible crime committed by Mr Seselja and me.
But what about 16 August? Let us see who spoke to that motion. You were sitting in the chair, Mr Speaker; I am not sure that you did speak to it. But Mr Corbell spoke. They had been charged, but he was happy to speak. Ms Hunter spoke. In fact, Ms Hunter was equating the actions at the CSIRO to those of Martin Luther King, clearly making a point. If it is as relevant for Mr Seselja and me that we have somehow broken some sub judice rule—if we had got up here and claimed that there is nothing to see here, that this is equivalent to Martin Luther King, that it is freedom—isn’t that sending a message to the courts? Isn’t it? Is it? I ask you: is that the message, Ms Hunter? I think it is.
And how about Ms Gallagher? Let me quote from Ms Gallagher on 16 August:
… the government do not support in any way the incident that occurred at CSIRO last month.
How is it, Mr Speaker, that Ms Gallagher can come into this place under sub judice on 16 August, when they had been charged on 12 August, and make the government’s position clear about what occurred, saying that “the government do not support in any way the incident that occurred at CSIRO last month”, and that go with you sitting in that chair completely without comment, completely without any sort of outrage from Mr Corbell? That was quite okay on 16 August, four days after the people were charged, and, as Mr Corbell outlined, when this applied equally as to when the comments were made by me and Mr Seselja.
Ms Le Couteur spoke. Ms Le Couteur spoke on 16 August. Mrs Dunne spoke on 16 August. Mr Coe spoke. I am sure he spoke very well on 16 August. Ms Bresnan spoke on 16 August. Mr Smyth spoke on 16 August. Mr Hargreaves spoke on 16 August. Mr Doszpot spoke on 16 August. And I spoke on 16 August. In actual fact, more members in this chamber spoke than did not speak on 16 August about this very issue while you presided in the chair. And you wonder why we are moving dissent from your ruling! It is rank hypocrisy.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video