Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2229..
MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):
It is appropriate for the estimate of the costs or savings to be done at the time the proposed law has been prepared, because it is the legislation, not the proposal, that governs what is and what is not done. Mr Speaker, I turn now to some of the arguments raised by Assembly members in debate on the 1995 Community Referendum Bill. Ms Follett said that this Bill - - -
Mr Moore: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. On the one hand, we have Mr Kaine taking a point of order against me under standing order 202(a), yet Mr Humphries, in spite of your directions, has referred again and again to the previous debate in the Assembly. He is doing it yet again, Mr Speaker, and you should name him under standing order 202(e) for wilfully disobeying the authority of the Chair. Name him, Mr Speaker.
MR HUMPHRIES: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: Standing orders require that I not reflect on a previous vote of the Assembly. I am not doing so. I am, however, commenting on previous comments made by members of the Assembly. If members of the Assembly were barred from commenting on the arguments or proposals of other members, there would be a very serious lack of debate in this place.
Mr Berry: It is reflecting on the vote.
MR HUMPHRIES: I am not reflecting on the vote. I make no reflection on the vote whatsoever.
Mr Kaine: Mr Speaker, on Mr Moore's point of order, I draw your attention to standing order 51, which says:
A Member may not allude to any debate or proceedings of the calendar year unless such allusion is relevant to the matter under discussion.
I submit that since the Minister is submitting a new Bill it is quite relevant to the discussion and therefore quite in accordance with standing orders.
Mr Moore: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: Had Mr Kaine not been asleep, he would have realised that I had been using standing order 52. That is the one that supports me, rather than standing order 51. Standing order 51 applies to debates of the same calendar year, and this is not about the same calendar year, so I would agree with Mr Kaine that standing order 51 would be inappropriate, which is why I referred to standing order 52.
MR SPEAKER: Proceed, Mr Humphries.
MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, Ms Follett said that this Bill would put more power - - -