Page 1288 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 27 March 2012

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

---

Question so resolved in the negative.

MR CORBELL: (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Sustainable Development, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (11.55): I thank those members who have indicated their support for this motion. This is about saying to Mr Seselja and Mr Hanson that the standing orders in this place apply to them as well. This is about saying to those members of the opposition that they have an obligation as well to express themselves carefully and diligently and with caution when it comes to matters that are before the courts. This is about saying to those members of the opposition that they have to have regard for the important principles of sub judice which this Assembly has agreed to and has given continuing effect to through a resolution.

The fact is, as other members of the government have indicated this morning, what Mr Seselja said and what Mr Hanson said was intemperate and had the ability to create the perception, if not the reality, of some prejudice in relation to a matter that was before the court. It had the ability to undermine people’s perception of independence of the actions of a court in relation to these matters.

These are serious issues. They are issues that warrant the type of motion that I have moved today. Simply put, this Assembly should state clearly and without any concern that this important principle of the separation of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial arms of government should be reaffirmed and that we should reaffirm our support for continuing resolution 10. It is an important resolution and one that we should all continue to have regard for. The comments made by Mr Seselja and Mr Hanson warrant a level of censure through the expression of grave concern so that members understand the importance of treating these matters carefully and with some caution rather than in the gung-ho and aggressive manner we saw from those members last week.

Question put:

That Mr Corbell’s motion be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video