Page 93 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 10 February 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This mob have the audacity to come in here and lecture us on moral issues, on ethical issues and on their compassion for the community when all the time what we have got is ministers of this place—
Mr Barr interjecting—
MR HANSON: Mr Barr wants to interject. He does not like this. Ministers of this place are regulating in the dead of night, at the 11th hour, to increase proceeds that would directly benefit the Labor Party and their clubs, and they wonder why we think that this is a problem, why we think that this is a lack of judgement.
Mr Corbell: Madam Assistant Speaker, on a point of order—
MR HANSON: Could we stop the clock, please, Madam Assistant Speaker?
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ms Lawder): Stop the clock, please. Mr Corbell.
Mr Corbell: If Mr Hanson wants to move a motion criticising the motivations in such a defamatory manner as he has just done, Madam Assistant Speaker, he needs to move a substantive motion. The motion is about Minister Burch. If he wants to draw aspersions about this frontbench in such a defamatory manner—I assure you, if he said outside what he just said in here it would be defamatory—he needs to do so by substantive motion. I ask you to ask him to withdraw the imputation. It is an improper imputation and he needs to confine himself to the matter at hand, which is the substantive motion against Minister Burch.
MR HANSON: On the point of order, Madam Assistant Speaker, as I said earlier in my speech, there are two possible explanations for Ms Burch’s action: a complete misunderstanding of the sensitivities of this issue or a deliberate attempt to essentially increase the proceeds that would go towards the Labor Club. This is a matter that has been litigated in the community, and it is quite reasonable for me to raise that as an issue in this Assembly. It goes directly to the minister’s judgement and her motives.
Mr Corbell: No, Madam Assistant Speaker, with your indulgence, the imputation was clear. The suggestion was that all ministers in this place were acting to further the financial interests of the Labor Party. That is a grossly improper imputation. It is not within the substance of the motion that is before the chair and it is disorderly. He must withdraw the imputation.
MR HANSON: On the point of order, I see no imputation. I stand by it, Madam Assistant Speaker. The reality is that the direct consequence—
Mr Corbell: No, it is not a debate.
MR HANSON: Well, I am not withdrawing it. I see no point of order.
Mr Corbell: Madam Assistant Speaker, I ask you to ask him to withdraw the imputation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video