Page 2697 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 29 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
to it. Ms Le Couteur should rest easy. Firstly, the response to the actual report is extraordinarily thin, so she should not have worried too much. Secondly, they have taken the time to respond to our report. Although we have not had a chance to go through it all, it is interesting to see what they have focused on and what they have not focused on. They have made some conclusions and assertions in relation to our report that they do not back up in any way.
Mr Smyth: Just broad statements.
MR SESELJA: There are a lot of broad statements—indeed, Mr Smyth:
The Government is concerned about the incorrect and unfair conclusion drawn by the dissenting Members that it has sought to avoid scrutiny …
But they do not actually go into any of the detail. There are a number of dot points where they just make broad assertions:
Many of the recommendations made in the report are unsubstantiated …
Well, say how they are unsubstantiated. Perhaps they could point us to specific examples. They have not been able to question any of our numbers; they have not been able to question any of the numbers put forward. I note that they follow the lead of the minister, the Treasurer, who in budget week could not dispute one word that we had said at the budget breakfast in relation to revenue. They could not put forward any sort of rational critique of what had been said by the opposition. Of course, the opposition made the following points. The main point—
Mr Hargreaves: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, I do not want to cut Mr Seselja off in full stride, but I am going to.
MR SESELJA: Could we stop the clock, please, Mr Speaker?
MR SPEAKER: Yes, certainly.
Mr Hargreaves: I am sorry, I should have said that first up. Mr Speaker, I would like to ask you about a ruling on the question of relevance. I know Mr Seselja has points that he wants to make in this regard, and I would not deny him that at all, but I just think it is probably the wrong spot within the context of the list of budget items. Perhaps we could just deal with the Legislative Assembly line and then at some other stage have a go.
Ms Gallagher interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, on the point of order?
MR SESELJA: I am sorry, I am laughing because Ms Gallagher finds this so amusing.
Ms Gallagher: You’re laughing too.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video