Page 303 - Week 01 - Thursday, 29 November 2012
MR SMYTH: Chief Minister, how do you explain to the community your repeated statements—
Mr Corbell: Point of order.
MR SMYTH: to one effect that are then followed by actions of your government—
MADAM SPEAKER: Sorry, Mr Smyth; just hang on a second.
Mr Corbell: Point of order: no preamble, Madam Speaker. No preamble.
MADAM SPEAKER: “How do you explain” is not a preamble.
Mr Seselja: Madam Speaker, on the point of order, I would ask you to either make a ruling or take note of the fact that Mr Corbell is now engaging in vexatious points of order. He is doing it to disrupt questions in question time. There was clearly no preamble there and yet he interrupted Mr Smyth as he is asking his question. I would ask you to ask Mr Corbell to stop the vexatious interruptions. If he does not have a genuine point of order, he should stay in his seat.
MADAM SPEAKER: There is no point of order. A question that begins with an interrogative pronoun does not have a preamble. Mr Smyth, would you like to start the question again because I have forgotten what it was.
MR SMYTH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My supplementary question is to the Chief Minister. How do you explain to the community your repeated statements to one effect that are then followed by actions of your government that are completely the opposite?
MS GALLAGHER: It is simply not the case. What is it now, Brendan—is it five election losses?
Mr Smyth interjecting—
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Smyth! And, Chief Minister, be directly relevant in answering the question.
MS GALLAGHER: My record has been judged by the community, Mr Smyth, and I am very happy with that result.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Seselja.
MR SESELJA: Minister, when was the decision taken?
MS GALLAGHER: In the days following receiving the support of Mr Rattenbury.
MR GENTLEMAN: A supplementary.