Page 5047 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 26 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): Order members! Members, please!
Members interjecting—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Excuse me, members; Ms Bresnan has the floor.
Mr Hanson: Mr Assistant Speaker—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: On a point of order?
Mr Hanson: Yes, on a point of order, Ms Gallagher just said that this is a pissing contest in the chamber, or words to that effect, and I would ask her to withdraw what is clearly unparliamentary language.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: With respect, Mr Hanson, I did not hear what was said across the chamber. All I heard were voices going across the chamber. I heard the Chief Minister’s voice, I heard Mr Smyth’s voice and I heard your voice. For me to arbitrate on any of that would be inappropriate; we will end up with a “he said, she said”. So I would ask for all members to just calm it and just keep it to yourselves. The debating process means that you have an opportunity to stand on your feet and have a go. But I cannot ask people to retract something I did not hear, Mr Hanson.
Mr Hanson: Mr Assistant Speaker, Ms Gallagher knows what she said, I am sure it will be recorded in the Hansard and I would invite her to withdraw.
Ms Gallagher: Mr Assistant Speaker, I withdraw those comments.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Ms Bresnan, you have the floor.
MS BRESNAN: I thank members for supporting the motion and for their contributions. I was hopeful to think we were going to get through a motion without anyone having some cheap political shots at people, but obviously that is too much to expect from Mr Hanson. It is good to know that he is actually listening to my speech, though. He mentioned in relation to another motion today something to the effect that anything I said was not worth listening to, so it is good to know that you do actually listen to some of what I have said in this chamber.
I would just like to refer to Ms Gallagher’s speech and clarify why I mentioned in my speech about having an interstate consultant. As I mentioned earlier in my speech, this was an issue that was brought to us from stakeholders because there had been such involvement in the debate that we had about Clare Holland House. A high number of people with an interest in palliative care involved in the debate brought the issue to us that it might be best to have someone from interstate. But I do absolutely acknowledge the fact that this is a difficult thing to incorporate under procurement guidelines and also the fact that there has been a tender process underway; I do acknowledge that. The key thing for us is that it is an independent review, and obviously that is occurring.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video