Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2011 Week 09 Hansard (Wednesday, 24 August 2011) . . Page.. 3806 ..
MS PORTER (Ginninderra) (5.08): The government will not be supporting the amendment by Mr Seselja. If Mr Seselja has written to his colleagues in defence of jobs for Canberra, I wonder if he has received a reply. Further, I am curious—and I am sure all over here and on the crossbench are curious—to see the answers he has received. I call on Mr Seselja, firstly, to table his correspondence on this matter to his federal colleagues today and, secondly, to table the letters in reply today. I am sure we would all be very interested to read his letters to his colleagues and I am sure we would all be very interested to read the responses he has received.
I call on him to continue to write to his colleagues. I do not think that if he has, in fact, written to his colleagues that that should stop him writing again and again until we have a satisfactory resolution to this very, very serious threat to Canberran jobs, to the Canberran economy and to the welfare of Canberrans.
I wonder if Mr Seselja has made a public announcement about his letter to his colleagues to reassure Canberrans. Is he about to make a statement in the chamber that will reassure Canberrans? Has Mr Seselja asked his federal colleagues to quantify the job losses if he is so convinced that the quantum that we have been discussing and anticipating is incorrect? What is the reliable information that he has received? Will he provide it to us all so that Canberrans can be reassured? I ask him to table this information today.
As Mr Smyth was speaking to Mr Seselja’s amendment, he was being holier than thou about the motion and he could not resist making personal slurs, which do not cover him in glory at all, I am afraid. Ms Hunter has been very clear in her intentions—
Mr Smyth: Point of order, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: Ms Porter, one moment, thank you. Stop the clocks, thank you.
Mr Smyth: Ms Porter said that I have made slurs against members. If they are inappropriate, she can bring them to my attention and I will withdraw them. If they are factual, then they will remain.
MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order—
Mr Smyth interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Mr Smyth, order! There is no point of order. You are, of course, entitled, Mr Smyth, to make an explanation under standing order 46 if you feel you have been adequately aggrieved.
Mr Smyth: But I am not sure what they are.
MR SPEAKER: then you have got nothing to complain about.