Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I think it is reasonable to say that on any objective analysis I have been far more relevant in this debate than the member for North Sydney ever was, and I think that same test would fairly apply to the member for Sturt. But let us go back to what has been happening here. The Leader of the House attempted to do what he does every Thursday and that is to move a suspension of standing orders so that private members' business can be brought on for a vote. That is the process that emanates from the Selection Committee. Then of course—very tricky as he can be—the member for Sturt did an extraordinary thing: he moved an amendment to that suspension so that, rather than deal with important private members' business, we deal instead with a stunt. That is what we are debating this morning and that is what I am talking about. I would have thought that the member for Gippsland might have made a contribution to this debate too, because this is his motion. The member for Gippsland obviously went to a lot of work: he consulted his constituency, he identified a very real problem, he took time in consultation with the clerks—

See this speech in context