Page 4194 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 16 November 2005

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


matters that have been deemed suitable or unsuitable for debate. Clearly, there is a fair bit of precedent. I would be interested, Mr Hargreaves, if you could point me to something said in the parliament in recent times to which the sub judice rule should have applied and where a court proceeding was actually interfered with.

It is right and proper to ensure that that does not happen. We will be assisted by codifying the practice, as we have attempted to do, not only to ensure the right of courts to go about their business without undue interference from parliament, but also to ensure that the right of the parliament to talk about matters in the public interest is protected. It is a fine balance and codifying it along the lines we have suggested would greatly assist this and future Assemblies.

Question put:

That Dr Foskey’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 8

Noes 9

Mrs Burke

Mr Seselja

Mr Berry

Ms MacDonald

Mrs Dunne

Mr Smyth

Mr Corbell

Ms Porter

Dr Foskey

Mr Stefaniak

Ms Gallagher

Mr Quinlan

Mr Mulcahy

Mr Gentleman

Mr Stanhope

Mr Pratt

Mr Hargreaves

Question so resolved in the negative.

Question put:

That Mr Stefaniak’s motion be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 7

Noes 10

Mrs Burke

Mr Smyth

Mr Berry

Mr Hargreaves

Mrs Dunne

Mr Stefaniak

Mr Corbell

Ms MacDonald

Mr Mulcahy

Dr Foskey

Ms Porter

Mr Pratt

Ms Gallagher

Mr Quinlan

Mr Seselja

Mr Gentleman

Mr Stanhope

Motion negatived.

Death penalty

MS MacDONALD (Brindabella) (11.31): I move:

That this Assembly reaffirms its abhorrence at the use of the death penalty in any circumstances.


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