Page 4350 - Week 10 - Thursday, 22 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
politically motivated attack on the basis of an extraordinarily bad week that the Labor Party has had in this place. That is what it is. When Katy Gallagher stands up here trying to patronise the members of the Assembly, the members of the opposition, let us remember exactly she is are doing that. It is because of the politics involved in this place.
What we are seeing here is the default position of the Labor and the Greens. It has nothing to do with the evidence. We saw that conclusively from Mr Barr’s appalling speech. If you are moving a motion of censure or a motion of no confidence in this place, you have got to take it seriously, you have got to have the evidence and you have got to have your case. Mr Barr had none. It was seven minutes of going through the motions, and barely that, to try and make the case.
It has been a bad week for the Greens and Labor. That is what has led them to this point. Probably the highlight was Mr Corbell being ejected from the chamber. And we saw the split last night with the arguments occurring within the Greens, in this place, in front of everybody. We had Meredith Hunter, as her default position on the voices, voting one way because it is the default position for Meredith and for Amanda to support the Labor Party. Then, after Caroline Le Couteur came down here and defended the chair, they changed their position between the two. What we are seeing here again is that split in the Greens, where we have the committee, chaired by Caroline Le Couteur, saying something—
MR SPEAKER: Mr Hanson, let us stick to the formal titles, thanks. “Ms Le Couteur” will be fine, thank you. I think it is the form of the place. Let us stick to that.
MR HANSON: Certainly. Ms Le Couteur, as the chair of the committee, has written to the Speaker and made certain comments which make it very clear:
… the majority of the Committee was of the view that the matter raised by Mr Smyth had caused interference with its work …
She said:
… if regarded as a precedent and repeated, to cause substantial interference with the scrutiny and oversight …
All Mr Smyth has done is essentially extrapolate that into his press release. He has said nothing that Ms Le Couteur has not said—that has been agreed to by the majority of this place.
I wonder what the conversations have been between Ms Le Couteur and the rest of the Greens on this matter. I would be very surprised if she is comfortable that essentially what she has said in the committee and what she has written to the Speaker is somehow voted on by her colleagues in this place, but when Mr Smyth puts it in a press release all of a sudden it is a matter for censure. This is simple tit for tat.
Let us have a look at the Greens’ form in this place, if you do not believe me, Mr Speaker. On 12 separate occasions when the Canberra Liberals have sought to move a vote of no confidence or a censure in this place on a member of the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video