Page 51 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 23 May 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That is all history - and we now have an eminent historian here to keep reminding us of our history. Bernard Collaery, having missed out, is demonstrating the general pattern of behaviour which we have seen so consistently over the last few months.
He has chosen the speech today to reflect upon other members of the chamber by innuendo and by direct reference. He seeks to destroy the credibility, without any substantial comment, but he keeps attacking. We saw that same sort of pattern of behaviour in question time today. I hope that as a result of the questions which have been taken on notice we will be able to clear up some of Bernard's mania. It was interesting to hear other people speak about telephone bugging. It is interesting that Bernard Collaery made a specific journey to the fifth floor of this building to speak to the Chief Minister to seek an assurance - this is the only issue that he came up about - that his phone would not be bugged.
There was another occasion during those protracted negotiations when Bernard cancelled a meeting between the Labor Party and the Residents Rally and said, "We will have to cancel that meeting. I believe that police with tracker dogs are following me". He wanted that meeting cancelled. It is quite an extraordinary behavioural pattern.
Mr Collaery: Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member is reflecting on a good breed of animal.
MR WHALAN: The more serious aspect of this matter of public importance is the wording. The wording relates to the actions of this chamber. That is why I would submit, Mr Speaker, that we have here a gross breach of standing orders. The matter refers to the actions of the Executive in relation to the election of the Leader of the Opposition.
At the time the Leader of the Opposition was elected there was no Executive in place. There had been an election of the Chief Minister, but no appointment of ministry, and no Executive in place. What is implied in this is that the action of this parliament in electing the Leader of the Opposition was in some way usurped or sabotaged by the Executive, that it was in some way manipulated by the Executive. That quite clearly was not the case because the Executive did not exist at that time. More importantly, it is a reflection upon the intention of this chamber to take a positive action, which was to appoint the current Leader of the Opposition, but it is consistent with the reflections upon this chamber.
I suggest that if this chamber was a little bit older in time Mr Collaery would not get away with the extravagant attacks that he is making upon this chamber as a chamber. I am not talking about attacks upon individuals, but attacks upon this chamber as a chamber of parliament. I refer members to the day that the chamber first met, when
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .