Page 1327 - Week 04 - Thursday, 10 April 2008

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

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Mr Seselja from moving an amendment.

I am not quite sure why the government does not want to debate this substantive amendment that has been circulated. It is different. This has been a moving feast this afternoon. The crossbench have gotten up—

Motion (by Mr Corbell) put:

That the question be now put.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 9		Noes 8
Mr Barr	Mr Hargreaves	Mrs Burke	Mr Seselja
Mr Berry	Ms MacDonald	Mrs Dunne	Mr Smyth
Mr Corbell	Ms Porter	Dr Foskey	Mr Stefaniak
Ms Gallagher	Mr Stanhope	Mr Mulcahy
Mr Gentleman		Mr Pratt

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Question put:

That the standing orders be suspended.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 8		Noes 9
Mrs Burke	Mr Seselja	Mr Barr	Mr Hargreaves
Mrs Dunne	Mr Smyth	Mr Berry	Ms MacDonald
Dr Foskey	Mr Stefaniak	Mr Corbell	Ms Porter
Mr Mulcahy		Ms Gallagher	Mr Stanhope
Mr Pratt		Mr Gentleman

Question so resolved in the negative.

MR SPEAKER: The question now is that the motion, as amended, be agreed to.

MR SESELJA (Molonglo––Leader of the Opposition) (4.51): The opposition is particularly disappointed that this motion will now see the government have a clear majority on this committee. What we have seen today is that the government, as we would have expected, do not want to be scrutinised, and the crossbench have made it clear that they do not want to scrutinise them. The combination of the two means that we will have a committee that is even more dominated by the government than we would have envisaged—in fact, even more dominated by the government than what the government had envisaged when they first put their amendments around this morning.

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