Page 3206 - Week 11 - Thursday, 13 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR COLLAERY: Mr Speaker, page 1349 reads as follows:
I came to this Assembly raw, inexperienced in politics and bursting to have a go and to even the score.
This is said in terms of the background of Mr Whalan's involvement with Federal ministers. I continued:
I believe that, in a debate on 4 July 1989 in response to a motion called by Mr Berry -
this was the motion Mr Berry called that produced this regrettable incident; and we wonder why the Left did it to Mr Whalan, but that is something that we all know about -
I overstepped the mark.
They are the words, Mr Speaker, that Mr Wood has forgotten - "I overstepped the mark". I said that in December and I say now that clearly I should never have tabled the document. It should have been supplied elsewhere in confidence in another circumstance. That was an error of judgment which I acknowledged, not in a mealy-mouthed way but directly in December, long before any good words about Paul Whalan were brought on by his resignation. That is the acknowledgment that was made. If that is not an apology, Mr Speaker, what is it?
HUMAN RIGHTS BILL 1990
Speaker's Ruling
MR SPEAKER: Yesterday, three private members' Bills were introduced into the Assembly. During introductory proceedings on two of those Bills - the Human Rights Bill 1990 and the Landlord and Tenant (Rental Bonds) Bill 1990 - points of order were taken that the Bills infringed the provisions of standing order 200 and section 65 of the ACT self-government Act.
I have examined the Bills and must inform the Assembly that the Human Rights Bill, if passed, would establish an office of commissioner of human rights and a human rights tribunal. The standing orders stipulate that it is only a Minister who may present such legislation, that is, legislation which has the object or effect of disposing or charging any public money of the Territory. I will therefore call on the Attorney-General as the manager of Government business to move the appropriate motion, pursuant to standing order 170.
I will be seeking further advice on the question whether the Landlord and Tenant (Rental Bonds) Bill 1990 contravenes the provisions of standing order 200. Unless there is a clear infringement of the standing orders, my intention is to maintain the current practice, which is to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .