Page 5102 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 28 November 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR BARR (Kurrajong—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development and Minister for Tourism and Major Events) (11.52): The government will not be supporting the suspension of standing orders for this political stunt from Mrs Dunne. Most of her contribution that we have just heard reflected on matters of process and sought to stress that this was not about an individual. That is belied by the motion that she seeks to move, which seeks to establish a committee of privilege inquiry into a former Chief Minister and now senator for the Australian Capital Territory.
It does seem curious that the high principles that Mrs Dunne claims to be focusing on are in fact not the intent of her notice of motion, or clearly her political intent, in raising these matters. If there is a need for the Assembly to look at particular practices and standing orders then that would be entirely appropriate for the administration and procedure committee to consider. Certainly the establishment of a select committee on privilege, in the terms that Mrs Dunne has circulated, would be the outcome of this, should there be a suspension of standing orders, and if we were then to go on to debate that particular motion.
It reflects someone who is seeking to maximise a political outcome when the clear evidence that has been presented to the Speaker and responded to in the context of the issues that are currently before the federal parliament in relation to citizenship matters is something that shall be dealt with by the federal parliament under the terms of the parliamentary agreement, as I understand it, in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
At the very least, it would be premature, given that we await the outcome of that declaration process both in the Senate and in the House of Representatives, to be moving on this matter today. It does reek of a political stunt, ahead of a range of other more important pieces of legislation and issues that need to be considered in this place today.
The government will not be supporting a suspension of standing orders to then have a subsequent debate on Mrs Dunne’s motion. I understand that she has lodged the motion. It is on the notice paper for debate later this week. That may or may not come forward at that time, but I would argue that, in the context of the process that is currently being undertaken in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, this place initiating its own special process in relation to a particular ACT senator is pre-emptive and reeks of politics.
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong) (11.55): The Greens do not intend to support a suspension of standing orders today. We feel that this has been brought on in such a way that we have only just received the documentation. We would certainly like some time to look at it. Mrs Dunne is obviously seeking to raise a series of quite important questions.
I note that there is already a motion on the notice paper for Thursday relating to similar matters. I think it is quite appropriate for us to look at all of these matters at once. I do not see any particular urgency about this. Assembly business on Thursday
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video