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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (13 June) . . Page.. 1607 ..

MR SPEAKER: No, sorry; there is no point of order. You have asked your question. Resume your seat.

Mr Corbell: Are you going to take my point of order, Mr Speaker?

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

Mr Corbell: You do not have the call, Chief Minister. Sit down.

MR SPEAKER: Order! You have asked your question.

Mr Corbell: I am elaborating on my point of order, Mr Speaker. Are you going to allow me to do so?

MR SPEAKER: I am not going to allow you to repeat your supplementary question.

Mr Corbell: I simply want to know: did the government receive a written agreement from Mr Hanna that he would pay those debts?

MR SPEAKER: You are now repeating it.

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, that was an abuse of standing orders. Mr Smyth had not completed his answer before Mr Corbell rose and wanted some other part of the answer. Secondly, the opposition's use of points of order to repeat questions in question time is out of order.

MR SPEAKER: It is out of order. Correct. I call Mr Kaine.

Mr Corbell: Is that the end of the answer, is it?

Mr Hird: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I have had enough of this. I would like to say that under standing order 39-and I rise on standing order 72-you ought to call these people to order, sir, or deal with them under 202.

MR SPEAKER: I am calling Mr Kaine, who I think has a question.

Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, I want to draw your attention to the fact that the minister had not completed his answer and was rising to his feet when you ignored him-and I would like to see if the minister is at least going to make an attempt to answer the question.

MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order, Mr Berry.

MR SMYTH: Mr Speaker, I have a little bit more to say.

MR SPEAKER: Very well, I shall indulge you. Go on.


: It is a pity that Mr Corbell interrupts when, by his own admission, I was answering the second part of his question first. As to the first part, no, we do not have a written assurance from the proponent, but then neither do we need it. The Chief

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