Mr BELL - 1995-05-24
Mr BELL (MacDonnell)(by leave): Mr Speaker, I wish to make an explanation pursuant to standing order 54 appropos the Minister for Education and Training's comments since he chose to refer to my interjection.
In Question Time yesterday, the Attorney-General, as minister responsible for the Anti-Discrimination Act, answered a question from his back bench saying that he intended to promote in remote areas the operation of the Anti-Discrimination Act and to have explained, presumably in Aboriginal communities where English is not spoken as a first language, the rights of those people under the Anti-Discrimination Act. I notice that, in seeking to disagree with my interjections, the minister said today that Mutitjulu has a teacher who is working currently there full time. Last night, I reread the debate held on this matter in August 1993. The fact is that, after I had drawn the attention of the minister's office to the discriminatory nature of the staffing arrangements between the Mutitjulu School and the Yulara School, nothing was done. The minister was liable therefore to action under the Anti-Discrimination Act. I drew this to the attention of the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner. I did not have standing. I indicated in 1993 that I might very well do what the minister is suggesting should be done now.
Mr FINCH: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The member for MacDonnell obtained leave to explain how he might have been misrepresented. However, it appears that all he wants to do is raise a general issue that is of no relevance.
Mr Bell: That is what you did in Question Time yesterday. You are getting your own back and you do not like it.
Mr FINCH: He has no cause for a personal explanation in that regard.
Mr SPEAKER: I ask the member for MacDonnell to come to the point of his explanation because I have not heard it as yet. A personal explanation should be short and to the point.
Mr BELL: I have endeavoured to explain to honourable members, and to people listening to the broadcast of the Assembly's proceedings, that the minister himself was in
Page 599
breach of the Anti-Discrimination Act and that it is hypocritical for him to turn around now and say that he is explaining people's rights in remote communities when he himself, as Minister for Education and Training, would not uphold them.
Mr FINCH: A point of order, Mr Speaker!
Mr Bell: I have finished. You can sit down now.
Mr FINCH: I do not believe that it is in the least parliamentary for the member to refer to myself as being hypocritical, particularly when he has absolutely no basis for doing so.
Mr SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Page 601
In Question Time yesterday, the Attorney-General, as minister responsible for the Anti-Discrimination Act, answered a question from his back bench saying that he intended to promote in remote areas the operation of the Anti-Discrimination Act and to have explained, presumably in Aboriginal communities where English is not spoken as a first language, the rights of those people under the Anti-Discrimination Act. I notice that, in seeking to disagree with my interjections, the minister said today that Mutitjulu has a teacher who is working currently there full time. Last night, I reread the debate held on this matter in August 1993. The fact is that, after I had drawn the attention of the minister's office to the discriminatory nature of the staffing arrangements between the Mutitjulu School and the Yulara School, nothing was done. The minister was liable therefore to action under the Anti-Discrimination Act. I drew this to the attention of the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner. I did not have standing. I indicated in 1993 that I might very well do what the minister is suggesting should be done now.
Mr FINCH: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The member for MacDonnell obtained leave to explain how he might have been misrepresented. However, it appears that all he wants to do is raise a general issue that is of no relevance.
Mr Bell: That is what you did in Question Time yesterday. You are getting your own back and you do not like it.
Mr FINCH: He has no cause for a personal explanation in that regard.
Mr SPEAKER: I ask the member for MacDonnell to come to the point of his explanation because I have not heard it as yet. A personal explanation should be short and to the point.
Mr BELL: I have endeavoured to explain to honourable members, and to people listening to the broadcast of the Assembly's proceedings, that the minister himself was in
Page 599
breach of the Anti-Discrimination Act and that it is hypocritical for him to turn around now and say that he is explaining people's rights in remote communities when he himself, as Minister for Education and Training, would not uphold them.
Mr FINCH: A point of order, Mr Speaker!
Mr Bell: I have finished. You can sit down now.
Mr FINCH: I do not believe that it is in the least parliamentary for the member to refer to myself as being hypocritical, particularly when he has absolutely no basis for doing so.
Mr SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Page 601
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016