Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2011 Week 4 Hansard (7 April) . . Page.. 1619..
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Certainly. Thank you very much, Mr Seselja. The answer to your question is that I asked Mr Coe forcefully three times to desist and the Chief Minister twice. I also told—
Opposition members interjecting—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Members! Mr, Hanson, would you like to dispute the ruling? I invite you to dispute the ruling.
Mr Seselja: Well, can we dissent?
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: You can do what you like. I have not finished making my explanation. Just resume your seat for a second and then you get the floor. Mr Seselja, I also said, and you were listening, that I was fed up with up it—it was the end of the day—I asked both sides of the chamber, and I did ask the Chief Minister twice to desist and I asked Mr Coe three times to desist, and I was halfway through it saying the next person would cop a warning. I delivered on that promise. I have been even-handed in all of my rulings, Mr Seselja. If you wish to dissent from that, I invite you to do so. Mr Hanson has the floor.
Dissent from ruling
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (5.30): Mr Assistant Speaker, I dissent from your ruling. The point is that you may have warned the Chief Minister only twice and Mr Coe three times, but—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Excuse me a second, Mr Hanson. I have just taken some technical advice. I do not wish to interrupt you mid-stream, but I am advised that you need to do it in the context of a dissent motion. So you need to seek leave to move such a dissent motion. It is just a procedural thing; I am sorry about that.
MR HANSON: Certainly, Mr Assistant Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion of dissent on your ruling.
Mr Barr: On a point of order, Mr Assistant Speaker, on a clarification. Is a warning a formal reprimand under the standing orders or is that something at the Speaker's discretion and it has no actual basis until you name a member?
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Thank you very much, Mr Barr. The answer to Mr Barr's question in his point of order is that there is no mention in the standing orders of a warning and what it constitutes. It is a convention in this place. It has been a convention in this place since 1989—
Mr Barr: There is no actual ruling to—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Mr Barr, I am not finished. The convention in this place is that on the receipt of the second warning it is a naming, in accordance with the standing order. The warning is a flag; it is a conventional flag to say that a