Page 1106 - Week 03 - Thursday, 26 February 2009

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

Schedule 1, part 1.7 agreed to.

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (3.34): I seek leave to introduce the appointments validation legislation, as was encouraged by the attorney in his remarks before we adjourned for lunch.

Leave not granted.

Standing and temporary orders—suspension

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (3.34): Madam Assistant Speaker, I move:

That so much of the standing and temporary orders be suspended as would prevent the introduction and passage today of a Bill for an Act to validate certain appointments.

Madam Assistant Speaker, these are difficult procedures to heap on to the chair, and I apologise for that, but I do not apologise for moving to suspend standing orders. This is an important issue, and I said in the debate on the in-principle stage of this bill that I would not go down this path of splitting the bill because members indicated on Tuesday that they would not give leave and would not move to suspend standing orders and that I would not have the requisite numbers. But in response to my comments, the minister went down the path of saying, “Well, if Mrs Dunne wants to be part of the solution, she should table her bill.”

Mr Corbell: No, that’s not what I said.

MRS DUNNE: He said, “She should table the bill and I will give her leave to do so.”

Mr Corbell: I did not say that.

MRS DUNNE: It was interesting, because as soon as I pulled out the bill that I was ready to table—

Mr Corbell: That’s outrageous. You’re an appalling liar, Mrs Dunne.

MRS DUNNE: Madam Assistant Speaker—

Mr Corbell: I withdraw the comment.

MRS DUNNE: Yes. As soon as I pulled out the bill and said to the minister that I was prepared to do just that, he realised that he had got himself in a fine pickle and then he filibustered for about five to 10 minutes, tediously repeating what he had said before so that the thing would run out before lunchtime.

This is an important issue. This is the path the Liberal opposition chose to go down in the first instance—that is, to split the bill, to take out the appointment validations from the current bill and to treat them separately. It is clear that the opposition and the

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