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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 13 Hansard (20 November) . . Page.. 3868 ..

MR HUMPHRIES: You have to be relevant when answering questions as well, Mr Speaker. It is the same criterion in both cases.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Humphries, this is not an issue about points of order at question time; it is an issue about relevance in a debate on a motion which is before the chamber. I am ordering you to be relevant, otherwise I will order you to sit down.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I am asking you to be consistent. You have ruled in the past, even as late as today, that going back over history is okay when it is relevant to a question before the house as opposed to a question without notice. I would submit to you that it is entirely relevant to take the same approach in such a matter.

MR SPEAKER: I am ordering you to be relevant to the motion which is before the chamber.

MR HUMPHRIES: I value your ruling, Mr Speaker-I won't necessarily say I respect it, but I value it.

Mr Speaker, what this motion does do today is suggest that the government ought to be prepared to-

Mr Quinlan: I have tabled it.

MR HUMPHRIES: He has tabled the protocol-very good. But he also has to be prepared to accept that more transparency needs to occur with respect to the operation of the remand centre.

Mr Quinlan: You are wandering again, Gary.

Ms Gallagher: Do you know what you are talking about?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I didn't interject at all when Mr Quinlan was speaking. I think-

Ms Gallagher: You weren't here.

MR SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr Humphries has the floor.

MR HUMPHRIES: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The fact is, Mr Speaker, that effectively we have a new remand centre created at Symonston. Mr Speaker, a new remand facility has effectively been created at Symonston. The minister, in the course of his remarks, addressed the question of whether the government promised to put high-risk or low-risk prisoners in that facility. Mr Speaker, that is not mentioned in this motion but you accepted the minister's comments on that as being relevant.

Mr Speaker, may I address the question of what the government has promised to do with respect to high-risk or low-risk prisoners? Do you rule that to be within the relevance of this motion on the basis that it has been already mentioned at length by the minister?

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