Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 10 Hansard (Thursday, 23 September 2010) . . Page.. 4462 ..

on the matter”. All Mr Hanson did was ask, “Will you uphold the standing orders?” I would seek your guidance as to whether you think it is adequate as Speaker to ignore the question raised, by simply saying, “Is there anything else you wish to add?”

Mr Corbell: Mr Speaker, again Mr Hanson’s comment was grossly disorderly. It was not asking a question. It was a direct imputation on your impartiality as the chair. It was disorderly, and I find it difficult to believe that anyone in this place could have perceived that comment in any other manner.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Smyth, I think in the spirit of ensuring you get an absolutely clear answer, I will go back and have a look at the Hansard on that one, and I will come back to the Assembly at a later time.

Mr Smyth: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: You are welcome. Mr Seselja.

Mr Seselja: Yes, thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to just raise the opposition’s concerns with a couple of the rulings that have come to us this week.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja—

Mr Corbell: Point of order.

MR SPEAKER: Before you go on—

Mr Corbell: Are you seeking leave? Is he seeking leave, Mr Speaker?

Mr Seselja: Well, I am raising a concern with the Speaker.

Mr Corbell: No, you need leave.

MR SPEAKER: Just one moment. Grab a seat, Mr Seselja. There is not actually a formal mechanism to have a discussion after question time about the Speaker’s conduct at question time. It would be fair to say that I have established a practice in this place where I have been open to receiving some discussion, but I think it is starting to reach a point where we are having quite detailed discussions after each question time, and I am not sure that that is the form of the house.

Mr Seselja: I would seek your indulgence, Mr—

MR SPEAKER: Order! Let me just finish, Mr Seselja. I am trying to maintain an approach as the Speaker that allows a level of openness, but I cannot entertain an approach where we constantly question this after each question time. So, before we enter into discussion, let us just have a look at a process here, Mr Seselja. How would you like to proceed?

Mr Seselja: I will just seek your indulgence to raise a couple of issues in relation to your rulings this week.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video