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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (29 November) . . Page.. 3384 ..


MR SPEAKER: I don't care what your interpretation of it is. The minister is answering the question.

Mr Wood: No, he is not. He is distorting it.

MR SPEAKER: He is entitled to answer it without constant interruptions and points of order. Please bear in mind that frivolous points of order can be dealt with too.

Mr Berry: There is nothing frivolous about this, Mr Speaker. This is an abuse of standing orders that I am talking about and I would have thought you would have given it more regard than to describe my attempts to make sure that they are adhered to as frivolous. Mr Speaker, I understand a bit of flexibility when it comes to standing order 118 (a), but this minister has abused it to a degree where he ought to be sat down for not answering the question. He has had plenty of opportunity to answer the question and he has declined to do so.

MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Resume your set.

Mr Berry: References to what Mr Wood may or may not have done have nothing at all to do with the question that was asked.

MR SPEAKER: Resume your seat. I think Mr Humphries-

Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, considering the fact that Mr Berry raises this same point of order again and again and that you rule exactly the same way again, would you look at the range of sanctions under standing order 202, where somebody persistently and wilfully obstructs the business of the house, refuses to conform and wilfully disregards the authority of the chair? I think there is a point at which you have to say to Mr Berry, "Enough," and name him.

MR SPEAKER: I refer Mr Berry to 202 (a).

Mr Hargreaves: Mr Speaker, still on a point of order: in view of all of this, possibly the minister has forgotten what the question was. The question required just a yes or no answer. I am not interested in his reasons.

MR SPEAKER: Sit down. You may be interested in a yes or no answer. The minister can answer the question as he sees fit.

Mr Berry: Oh, no, he can't.

MR SPEAKER: Yes, he can.

MR SMYTH: Mr Speaker, I believe that I have answered the question.

Mr Wood: He must be to the point. You have to uphold the standing orders.

MR SMYTH

: The answer, quite clearly, is that the process must be followed. Yet again the Labor Party wants to throw the process out the window and disavow what was done in the past. We already know that Mr Corbell wants to run away from what Mr Wood


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