Page 848 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 27 February 2013

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

Ms Gallagher interjecting—

MR HANSON: You have to ask: why is it that there was no motion from those opposite when Mr Stanhope left this place? When Mr Stanhope left this place—

Members interjecting—

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Doszpot): Chief Minister and Ms Burch, we are not in question time now.

MR HANSON: Where was the argument that Mr Stanhope has betrayed the people of Ginninderra? I did not see the indignation from those opposite then. No, I did not. No. It was all: “Congratulations, Jon. Good luck. Well done.” It was a pat on the back and a welcome to Dr Bourke. And what a success that was! If ever we have seen a betrayal of the people of Canberra, it was when Jon Stanhope left here and it ended up with Dr Bourke being the representative of the people of Ginninderra. Now that, members, is a betrayal.

We see the hypocrisy of those opposite. “No, he retired.” He went off to wherever he went—to a job at the University of Canberra, a government job at the University of Canberra, and then off to Christmas Island, an appointment by—

Mr Wall: By his Labor mates.

MR HANSON: Labor mates, exactly right. But no, that is all right. He can do that and we can bring in a dud like Chris Bourke, but if someone wants to step up and fight for the people—

Ms Burch: Point of order.


Ms Burch: A dud? Given the other language that has been ruled out of order as being unparliamentary, I ask that that be withdrawn.

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Mr Hanson, I would like to ask you to withdraw.

MR HANSON: I happily withdraw it, Mr Assistant Speaker.

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Mr Hanson, before you continue, let me say this: members, this is not question time; let us give the speaker a go. Chief Minister, you will have an opportunity to respond.

MR HANSON: I could use some other language that probably is parliamentary, but the fact that Dr Bourke was on the frontbench and was sacked to the backbench probably suggests that my sentiment is shared by those opposite, whether they would use the word “dud” or not. Obviously, they would not, because that would be unparliamentary.

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