Page 1267 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 27 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Hanson raises the context of the previous debate. Go back, read the Hansard and look at how other members of the Assembly managed to contribute in that debate without finding themselves in breach of this continuing resolution. That is the fundamental issue that Mr Seselja and Mr Hanson have to address. It would appear that at no point is there any self-reflection, any analysis: “Maybe I went too far. Maybe I made the political point I want to make and I don’t need to get myself into this difficulty.” But no.
So keen are they, Mr Speaker, to pursue the vendetta against you that they will go too far. And they have on this occasion. Their colleagues know it. Everyone else knows it. Every independent observer knows it. But there are two people who could never really bring themselves to reflect upon their own contributions and maybe reflect that, yes, in trying to make the point, they went too far.
On that basis, Mr Speaker, there is no need to dissent from your ruling. Your ruling is appropriate and it should be upheld.
MR COE (Ginninderra) (10.39): We have just heard a very interesting speech by Mr Barr, who has not quite been nuanced enough. He has absolutely blatantly tried to invoke the Labor-Greens agreement on this issue. That is what you have done. You have looked the Speaker in the eye, you have given him all the platitudes. You have, in effect, conveyed to him that the real enemy here is the Liberal Party: “Labor and the Greens, we hate the Liberal Party. A bit of solidarity, mate, and you will do the right thing.” You were not quite nuanced enough, Andrew. You were not quite nuanced enough, because you have conveyed—
Mr Hargreaves: A point of order, Mr Speaker. It is normal practice in this place for members to be addressed by their surname preceded by “Mr” or “Ms”. It is unparliamentary to refer to people by their Christian names across the chamber.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Hargreaves.
MR COE: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I take that point of order on board. It is nice to know that Mr Hargreaves is still relevant to this place. It is nice to know that he is still making a contribution to public office, because that is all we are seeing from Mr Hargreaves—petty points to try and show that he has still got it. Unlike Mr Hargreaves, Mr Barr is somewhat relevant. Whilst I do disagree with the vast majority of what he has to say, he is still relevant. And he is, indeed, a political operator except, of course, he was not subtle enough when trying to invoke the Labor-Greens agreement on this issue.
It is funny; you can hand pick when they try and invoke it. Sometimes you hear them on the radio. You have got the Greens to the left, the Liberals to the right, Labor in the centre et cetera. Yet when push comes to shove and they need the Greens’ support—they need your support, Mr Speaker—suddenly he is the Greens’ best friend. It is going to be very hard, I think, for you, Mr Speaker, to get out of this tricky situation which I believe you have landed yourself in. It is, indeed, your unprofessionalism in making—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video