Page 3198 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 16 August 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
another Green or I would accept a member of the Labor Party. We voted for Mrs Dunne, and we believe she would be the best person in this role. But given the seriousness of this, we would be prepared to relinquish that claim in order to see an alternative Speaker in Mr Rattenbury’s place. This is not about Labor, Liberal or Green; it is about respect for the laws of this Assembly, the dignity of the office and faith in parliamentary process.
I implore this Assembly to respect the rule of law and the dignity of parliament and send a clear message that this Assembly is where violent, illegal acts are condemned, not encouraged. Protest should be done through voting, not violence. Change should be encouraged through listening to others’ ideas, not destroying others’ property. We have a Speaker who thinks differently. He openly encourages illegal acts, citing that sometimes the end justifies the means. It does not. I move no confidence in the Speaker.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (10.15): I move the amendment circulated in my name:
Omit all words after “That this Assembly”, substitute:
“(1) expresses its ongoing confidence in the capacity of the Speaker to perform his duties fairly and impartially;
(2) reaffirms the importance of all Members upholding and supporting the principle of the rule of law; and
(3) urges all Members to refrain from comments which may be perceived as supporting unlawful protest.”.
Mr Speaker, the issues that Mr Seselja raises in his motion today are matters that are worthy of discussion in this place, and the government welcomes the opportunity to ventilate these issues this morning. But the government’s view is also very clear: the perspective that Mr Seselja and the opposition have chosen to take on this particular matter is out of all proportion to the actual content of the comments made by you in relation to the Greenpeace protest.
I want to make it very clear that the government does not support or condone any unlawful action. Of course, it is also worth observing that these matters are still before the courts, and guilt has not yet been proven in relation to this matter. That is a matter that we should appropriately keep in that context.
Let us have a look very closely at what you said, Mr Speaker, in your interview. You did not say that the end justified the means. Indeed, I understand that the ABC apologised for the use of that term when it was tweeted by the presenter following your interview on that day, 14 July. What you said, Mr Speaker, was that there were circumstances where a certain organisation had chosen to break the law to pursue its political ends. Mr Speaker, we understand your past association with this organisation but that does not—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video