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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 9 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 2221 ..

Mr Moore: I think I will take a point of order at this point, Mr Speaker. The second motion has not been moved, although it has been circulated; so to declare it out of order now is entirely inappropriate. To indicate to members that it will be out of order, if moved, is another situation that we can deal with. Although I have circulated a second motion so that members can see what it is, it is appropriate for us to deal with the motion that is before us. If that is carried, Mr Speaker, I shall move the second motion and then consider whether dissent from your ruling on whether it is in order is appropriate or not, but for the time being I think it is appropriate that we deal with just the motion in front of us.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Moore, I pointed out that you had circulated two motions. I did not say that you had moved two motions. I think even you would agree that the second motion, which you have not yet moved but propose to move, as you indicated, is germane to the first. Therefore, I believe that I was correct in making the statement that I have made, namely, that, whilst your first motion is in order, your second motion is out of order.

Mr Moore: No, not at all.

MR SPEAKER: When you choose to move it.

Mr Moore: Thank you. That does make a difference.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (4.01): Mr Speaker, I rise to oppose the first motion on the sheet that Mr Moore has circulated, which I understand is the only motion that he has moved at this point. He proposes that the Schedule be considered as a whole. The Schedule is a relatively long document with a great many components, and traditionally members of the Assembly have considered the line items within the Appropriation Bill Schedule item by item in order to debate issues arising out of those particular items.

I would suggest that, in the absence of any decision on the second motion circulated in Mr Moore's name, it is unfortunate for the Assembly to deal with the Schedule as a whole. If the Assembly were to resolve that it should treat the Schedule as a single vote, as Mr Moore's second motion proposes, then certainly there is some point in treating the Schedule as a whole.

Mr Moore: Why do you not indicate what you would do with the second motion?

MR HUMPHRIES: I think I have already made it perfectly plain. We intend to oppose the second motion. Since we intend to oppose the second motion, we think that it is dangerous to consider the first motion in isolation from the second motion. If the first motion passes and the second motion fails, then we are stuck with considering the whole of the Schedule as a block without achieving Mr Moore's goal. Mr Speaker, I would urge members not to support this motion. If Mr Moore wanted to move both parts together, there would be more point to that; but moving only the first part of the motion makes very little sense and I therefore oppose it.

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