Page 2834 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 August 2013
Mr Doszpot: Yes.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: You will withdraw that, please.
Mr Doszpot: I will withdraw it.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you very much. Mr Corbell.
Mr Corbell: Madam Deputy Speaker, a no-confidence motion is the most serious motion that can be moved against a member in this place, and the member is entitled to use whatever arguments he believes in this case are relevant to address those points.
Secondly, it has always been accepted in this place that a no-confidence motion is a wide-ranging debate, and this motion goes centrally to whether or not this budget is a credible budget. The Treasurer is directly addressing all of those matters. There is no point of order.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Corbell. There is no point of order. Mr Barr.
MR BARR: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The government is delivering an important budget for the territory at this time. It is very clear that those opposite would have a different approach. They would follow the approach of other conservative state and territory governments. And let us look at that record: in Queensland they cut 12,800 public service positions, in New South Wales, 10,000; in Victoria, 4,200; in WA in their budget just in the last week, another 1,000 public sector jobs went. That is the Liberal Party's record. That is the position. That is their alternative view. And true to form, they want to sack 12,000 public servants federally in Canberra. Joe Hockey has recently said—
Mr Smyth: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker—you might stop the clock as a courtesy to the Treasurer.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please stop the clock. Mr Smyth, have you got a point of order?
Mr Smyth: Yes, I accept the notion that debates are wide ranging, but they must also be relevant. There are four points in my motion: Mr Barr’s modelling, the need for an amended appropriation bill, the effect of the light rail on Canberra households and the fact that we are debating a budget on which we do not have all the details. He must address those at least vaguely or come to them at some stage, and I ask you to call him to order and ask him to be relevant.
Mr Corbell: On the point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker, Mr Smyth is simply seeking now to interrupt the Treasurer in his defence. You have previously ruled that this is a wide-ranging debate and the Treasurer is entitled to assert why the budget is appropriate and why his management of it is appropriate. That is exactly what he is doing. The opposition may not like that, but now they are simply trying to interrupt his speech and his defence against this motion, and there is clearly no point of order.