Legislative Assembly
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
2662 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Tuesday 17 October 2006 ______ Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Joseph Aquilina) took the chair at 2.15 p.m. Mr Speaker offered the Prayer. Mr SPEAKER: I acknowledge the Gadigal clan of the Eora nation and its elders and thank them for their custodianship of this land. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Address by the Member for Hawkesbury: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders Mr STEVEN PRINGLE: I seek leave to suspend standing and sessional orders to allow me to make a statement to the House. Leave not granted. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Address by the Member for Hawkesbury: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders Mr CARL SCULLY (Smithfield—Minister for Police) [2.20 p.m.]: I move: That standing and sessional orders be suspended to permit the member for Hawkesbury to address the House forthwith. Mr BARRY O'FARRELL (Ku-ring-gai—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [2.21 p.m.]: Notwithstanding a devastating drought affecting rural communities, a Sydney water crisis that even on a wet day sees no recycling, cover-ups in relation to reports into the Cronulla riots and cuts to the highway patrol, once again the Government is prepared to do anything to distract people's attention from the main issues affecting the State. The simple question that needs to be asked is: Why does this matter have to come on now when the honourable member for Hawkesbury could easily raise it during private members' statements at 5.15 p.m. today, when standing orders provide that we can raise issues relating to our electorates? I want to say a couple of things to the honourable member for Hawkesbury. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Hawkesbury will resume his seat. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has the call. Mr BARRY O'FARRELL: I do not think any member of a political party in this place has anything but sympathy for the situation in which the honourable member for Hawkesbury finds himself. There are people on this side of the House who certainly worked long and hard to try to ensure that the result did not occur, but I make the point that the Liberal and National parties have a system under which branch members decide who is to be a member of Parliament. We have a system under which there is no automatic right of endorsement, whether one is a party leader or the most junior of backbenchers. We certainly do not have the N40 rule, which is used by the Labor Party to discard the likes of the honourable member for Newcastle, Bryce Gaudry, and impose someone against the wishes of local branch members. I make the point that the system that produced the result that the honourable member for Hawkesbury clearly feels concerned about is the same system from which he benefited four years ago. It is the same system that applied to the former member for Hawkesbury, who at that time no doubt shared the emotions the honourable member for Hawkesbury feels today. Given the way the former member for Hawkesbury behaved and the dignity with which he handled the situation that confronted him, I urge the honourable member for Hawkesbury to use him as the role model for whatever he might say today. In anticipation of what the honourable member for Hawkesbury may or may not say in this place I say to him: If he has concerns about the process there are appeals mechanisms within parties. I remind the House that only two weeks ago in another 17 October 2006 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 2663 division a preselected result was overturned by State Council as a result of the use of those processes. I would have thought that would have been the first action taken by the honourable member for Hawkesbury. Second, if the honourable member for Hawkesbury has wider concerns I remind him that in August the Liberal Party referred certain matters to the Independent Commission against Corruption [ICAC]. The Liberal Party has not yet heard back from ICAC about those matters, but I think the commission ought to be allowed to fully investigate and examine them without any encouragement from this place. In anticipation of what the honourable member for Hawkesbury may say, I also want to say that 72 hours ago both candidates were asked questions by the preselection panel. One question they were asked was whether, if they were unsuccessful, they would run against the Liberal Party. The honourable member for Hawkesbury was clear and firm in his answer. He said he was totally committed to the Liberal Party and would not do such a thing. I certainly hope that in what the honourable member for Hawkesbury is about to say to the House he bears in mind those comments that he made to a room, half of which was filled with people who strongly supported him throughout the preselection process. I assume that the present procedure is being followed only because things are going to be said within the parliamentary confines of this Chamber that the honourable member for Hawkesbury may not be prepared to say outside the Chamber. I say that because I remember that when the honourable member for Port Macquarie made a similar move, he did so through television interviews outside the House. He certainly did not seek to interrupt question time or seek to use the House in the way the honourable member for Hawkesbury is doing, with the support of the Government. All I do is simply ask the honourable member for Hawkesbury to exercise the usual caution when using the right that members have in this place under parliamentary privilege. Question—That the motion be agreed to—put. The House divided. Ayes, 58 Ms Allan Ms Hay Mr Pearce Mr Amery Mr Hickey Mrs Perry Ms Andrews Mr Hunter Mr Price Mr Barr Mr Iemma Mr Pringle Mr Bartlett Ms Judge Ms Saliba Ms Beamer Ms Keneally Mr Sartor Mr Black Mr Lynch Mr Scully Mr Brown Mr McBride Mr Shearan Ms Burney Mr McLeay Mr Stewart Mr Campbell Mr McTaggart Ms Tebbutt Mr Chaytor Ms Meagher Mr Torbay Mr Corrigan Ms Megarrity Mr Tripodi Mr Crittenden Mr Mills Mr Watkins Mr Daley Ms Moore Mr West Mr Debus Mr Morris Mr Whan Mr Draper Mr Newell Mr Yeadon Mrs Fardell Ms Nori Ms Gadiel Mr Oakeshott Tellers, Mr Gaudry Mr Orkopoulos Mr Ashton Mr Gibson Mrs Paluzzano Mr Martin Noes, 27 Mr Aplin Mrs Hopwood Mr Slack-Smith Ms Berejiklian Mr Humpherson Mr Souris Mr Cansdell Mr Kerr Mr Stoner Mr Constance Mr Merton Mr Tink Mr Debnam Mr O'Farrell Mr J. H. Turner Mr Fraser Mr Page Mrs Hancock Mr Piccoli Mr Hartcher Mr Richardson Tellers, Mr Hazzard Mr Roberts Mr George Ms Hodgkinson Mrs Skinner Mr Maguire 2664 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 17 October 2006 Pair Ms D'Amore Ms Seaton Question resolved in the affirmative. Motion agreed to. HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR HAWKESBURY Mr STEVEN PRINGLE: It is ironic that those behind me have been so supportive. I want to say how much I have appreciated the many phone calls from my colleagues, particularly those aligned with the Right, about how outraged and disgusted they are with the way I was dumped from the Liberal Party's endorsement. They are incredulous that such an injustice could occur within the Liberal Party. But, like turkeys waiting for Christmas, they are too fearful to speak out in case they are the next on the list. I sought preselection because I am proud of my record of service to the people of the Hawkesbury. But rather than boast, I lay upon the table of the House for the information of members a reference from the Leader of the Opposition, Peter Debnam, outlining my credentials: [Steven’s] personal experience with State and Local Government has provided him with a comprehensive understanding of the impact of government action or inaction on his constituents. He is extremely proud to be representing the constituents of the Hawkesbury and constantly demonstrates his effectiveness in representing their concerns. He is well versed with the many issues [in his electorate] … [Steven] is a very effective voice in Parliament for the people of the Hawkesbury and his colleagues have all benefited from his hard work … In summary, Steven is a valued member of parliament, a hard-working and highly effective local member and he has my full support. I joined the Liberal Party 28 years ago because I passionately believed in its values of maximising individual and private sector initiative and encouraging its citizens. The party was fondly described as a broad church that prided itself on equal opportunity and tolerance for all Australians: freedom of parliamentary democracy, freedom of thought, freedom of worship. I knew there were issues within the Liberal Party, but until Saturday—the ides of October—I did not realise the depths that the party has sunk to. Freedom of democracy means freedom to cram hundreds of people into branches, particularly those who do not ask questions. Freedom of thought is acceptable as long as your thoughts are the same as the faceless factional head. Freedom of worship is encouraged so long as it is Opus Dei. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Gosford to order. Mr STEVEN PRINGLE: The broad church of the Liberal Party is now controlled by an exclusive sect, an extremist right-wing group, and the seat of Hawkesbury is being used as a possession of factional warriors to bestow on those who suit their agendas. The preselection on Saturday was a complete rort because many people were party members for only three months.