Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2016 Week 6 Hansard (8 June) . .
MR RATTENBURY: There is a funding formula for our non-government schools, which I spoke about in my earlier answer. It is an interesting one; I have seen the response from the Catholic Education Office today. The first thing I can tell the house is that that is not an issue the Catholic Education Office has previously raised with me. In the meeting that I have had with them they have not indicated to me they were concerned about this.
The other thing is that the Catholic Education Office is an independent system and the ACT government does not direct them as to how they spend their resources. It is a matter for the Catholic Education Office to determine how they wish to spend the resources that are made available to them.
MADAM SPEAKER: No conversations, Mr Barr, Mr Coe.
MR RATTENBURY: I am more than happy to continue to have those conversations if they want to raise those issues with me directly.
Mr Barr: I ask that all further questions be placed on the notice paper.
Statement by Speaker—clarification
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo): Madam Speaker, I seek clarification on a ruling or a decision you made earlier this morning about members inciting those opposite to interject, and I want to seek clarification as I do not believe that to be in the standing orders.
MADAM SPEAKER: I did not make a ruling. I was very clear that I did not make a ruling. I went back and reviewed the online video. I did not make a ruling. I think the same thing happened in question time today. The point that I made was that it is the responsibility of everyone in this place to maintain order. I refer you to the companion to the standing orders at 10.158:
Disorder is quite simply any behaviour by Members or people in the public galleries which makes it difficult to conduct the business of the Assembly ...
I was drawing your attention, Mr Rattenbury, to what had happened. Your intervention had caused a fairly large outpouring of interjection, the same as some of the comments across the floor between Mr Coe and Mr Corbell today caused interjection, and I reminded members that everyone is responsible for it. If a member had chosen to rise and question the line of your argument in relation to standing order 58 you would have been ruled out of order because there was nothing in what you were speaking about—Mr Seselja, a former member of this place, and Mr Hanson not turning up to events where Greens speak—that was in fact relevant to the budget debate.
Next page . .
Previous page. . . .
Speeches . . . .
Contents . . . .
Sittings . . . .