Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 8 Hansard (26 August) . . Page.. 2500 ..
MR QUINLAN: I ask a supplementary question. Given the magnitude of this possible merger and its obvious significance to the ACT, do you have any formal agreement or arrangement with New South Wales for the progress of the report into a merger proposition, or is this the same sort of unprofessional fly by the seat of your pants approach that gave us the Bruce Stadium fiasco?
Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. You warn these people about what they should not do, and they flagrantly and deliberately breach the standing orders a second time and a third time and a fourth time. I can guess what is going to come in the rest of the questions today. I think members are deliberately - not accidentally but deliberately - breaching standing orders.
Mr Berry: Which one?
Mr Humphries: You know perfectly well, Mr Berry.
Mr Moore: Standing order 117(b)(iii) and (iv).
MR SPEAKER: Yes.
Mr Berry: Go away. Is a little bit of gratuitous body language out of order?
MR SPEAKER: Mr Kaine, would you like to bring this thing back on the rails?
Mr Kaine: I would like to ask a question - - -
Mr Quinlan: Do I get an answer to my question?
Mr Moore: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: Body language is out of order. I would look at standing order 202(b) if I were you, Mr Berry.
Mr Quinlan: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. Have you ruled my question out of order?
MR SPEAKER: Yes, I have.
MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Treasurer. This is a very serious question, and he may wish to consult with senior officers of the Treasury in order to answer it. I refer the Minister to page 3 of the Consolidated Financial Management Report for 30 June 1999. On that page there is reference to a liquidity ratio. I will make the question simple. I will put it in objective form. Minister, is a liquidity ratio: