Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 8 Hansard (26 October) . . Page.. 2115 ..


MR BERRY: I seek leave to make a personal explanation, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Under standing order 46, Mr Berry?

MR BERRY: Indeed. Mr Speaker, during question time Mr Stefaniak made the claim that I and Ms McRae had gatecrashed the public meeting at Charnwood High School. That meeting was a public meeting to which all and sundry were invited. The gates were wide open - two big double doors. Even Mr Stefaniak could have come along had he had the courage to face the community. I can understand - - -

Mr Stefaniak: I was not invited, Wayne; otherwise I would have been there.

MR BERRY: It was a public meeting. Mr Moore was invited and did not turn up either, but he still sought to close down the school. No wonder he did not turn up.

MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Berry! You may explain matters of a personal nature but you must not debate the issue.

MR BERRY: There is no issue up for debate. Mr Speaker, I think the Assembly was misled in relation to this matter.

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, on a point of order - - -

MR BERRY: I withdraw that. Mr Stefaniak owes the Assembly an apology for saying that, because it was a public meeting. All members of the public were invited, even him, and he did not have the courage to turn up.

Mr Moore: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I would like to draw your attention to standing order 202(e). That standing order talks about a member being disorderly and specifically refers to a member who persistently and wilfully disregards the authority of the Chair. Mr Speaker, I would ask you to keep an eye on Mr Berry because I think he really pushes the bounds as far as that standing order goes.

Statements by Members

Debate resumed.

MR KAINE (3.21): Mr Speaker, the debate this morning on this subject is one of the least edifying and the least gratifying that I have experienced in nearly 20 years as an elected member of various bodies in the ACT. It began because the Labor Party had decided that they were going to get somebody's hide over something. They persisted over a number of days with questions that were aimed not at accusing anybody of anything but at trying to elicit information about something. They were singularly unsuccessful.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .