Page 2486 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 23 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Moore: I raise a point of order. Madam Speaker, you have already ruled on standing order 118. I would like once again to draw your attention to paragraphs (a) and (b) of standing order 118. I believe that the Minister not only is not being concise but also is debating the matter. This is clearly, as far as I am concerned, Madam Speaker, a breach of standing orders. It is an inappropriate use of question time, and I would ask you to call on this Minister to desist.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Moore, thank you for bringing that to my attention. As I was listening I was beginning to think that the answer was getting rather long. I do accept that the accusation could well be made that the standing order is being breached. However, I would like the Minister to conclude his answer, in his own time, on the ground that this issue is of extreme importance. There was criticism levelled, when the motion of no confidence was put against the then Minister, Mr Berry, about the number of interjections and the difficulty that there was in interpreting what he had said in his answers to previous questions. I remember that being raised in the house. I am not setting a precedent that I will allow any Minister to read five pages to us ever again; but in this instance, on this matter, I would like the Minister to conclude his answer in his own time.
Mr Stevenson: I take a point of order, Madam Speaker. I think we would all agree that the Minister should present all the details of this matter, but he does not have to do it in answer to a question. It can be done as a ministerial statement. That is the point.
MADAM SPEAKER: I take the point, Mr Stevenson, but the standing orders require that an answer be concise. As Mr Moore pointed out to me, the definition of "concise" was being pushed a little; but this is a complex question, and "concise" can allow for 10 pages in answer to a complex question. I cannot judge that until it is complete. I have given my ruling. I have not set a precedent. I will not treat this matter as one to be taken lightly every question time. However, this is an issue that has presented the house with grave and complex questions before, and I believe that it is only proper that I allow the Minister to finish, in his own time. Proceed, Mr Lamont.
Ms Follett: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, could I just advise that I had not intended closing question time before all members had asked a question so that they can take advantage of the cameras still being here.
MADAM SPEAKER: Thank you, Chief Minister. The point has now been made. Proceed, Mr Lamont.
MR LAMONT: Thank you. I do thank you, Madam Speaker, for your forbearance. It is indeed a complex matter, Mr Moore, and it needed to have at least that much detail added to it. Madam Speaker, the Tabcorp contract provides for an initial term of three years, with a three-year option; a commission structure on a sliding scale, and significantly lower than the fee imposed by the New South Wales TAB; equivalent rights in regard to any termination of the agreement; and no termination, without cause, in the first three years.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .