❓ A parliamentary question probes whether the Leader of the House orchestrated a diversionary tactic involving Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Paddy Embry to advance the Labour Relations Reform Bill. The Leader denies any such coordinated effort.
AnsweredQoN 1364Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
LABOUR RELATIONS REFORM BILL, SECOND READING VOTE
I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens before deciding to have no further government speakers and to seek to bring the second reading to a vote. (1) Did Hon Tom Stephens then go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry? (2) Had the Leader of the House made Hon Tom Stephens aware of what he intended to do? (3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE
I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens before deciding to have no further government speakers and to seek to bring the second reading to a vote. (1) Did Hon Tom Stephens then go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry? (2) Had the Leader of the House made Hon Tom Stephens aware of what he intended to do? (3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(1) Did Hon Tom Stephens then go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry? (2) Had the Leader of the House made Hon Tom Stephens aware of what he intended to do? (3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(2) Had the Leader of the House made Hon Tom Stephens aware of what he intended to do? (3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(1) Did Hon Tom Stephens then go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry? (2) Had the Leader of the House made Hon Tom Stephens aware of what he intended to do? (3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(2) Had the Leader of the House made Hon Tom Stephens aware of what he intended to do? (3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(3) Was it his understanding that Hon Tom Stephens would engage Hon Paddy Embry in conversation while this occurred? (4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(4) Was it his understanding that this manoeuvre would divert Hon Paddy Embry, so as to secure the Government an advantage in the business of the Chamber? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: What a nonsense question. The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The question was not addressed to the parliamentary secretary, so she will not answer it. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
I do not know if Hon Peter Foss has that question printed. Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Peter Foss: I have it, if you can read my handwriting. It is better than nothing, I suppose. Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: With a series of four questions of that nature - Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Norman Moore: You would not want to get it wrong. Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: I would rather be certain that I understand the question. I think the answers to the question in order are yes, no, no, not aware and no, but I will look at the question. It states, “I refer to the Leader of the House’s statement to the House during Tuesday’s adjournment debate that he consulted Hon Tom Stephens . . . ” Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Tom Stephens: You did not consult me; I told you what I thought. The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! This is not a corporate effort. Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: It is true that I spoke to Hon Tom Stephens and Hon Nick Griffiths about the situation that had developed in the House, so the answers are - (1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(1) Yes, I believe that Hon Tom Stephens did go across to speak to Hon Paddy Embry, because I recall seeing him sitting alongside Hon Paddy Embry at that time. (2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(2) Unequivocally no; when Hon Tom Stephens left his seat he was not aware of the decision that I had made. Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon Norman Moore: Even though he suggested it. Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Even though we had discussed it. The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Leader of the House will address the question and not supplementary questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Hon KIM CHANCE: He was not aware of my decision, and that is the question I have before me. (3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(3) I had no reason to know what the Minister for Housing - Point of Order Hon PADDY EMBRY: I feel I should correct the minister. At no point did the - The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. There is no place for a personal explanation at this stage. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon KIM CHANCE: I understand that Hon Paddy Embry can make a personal explanation after I have completed my answer. The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The answer to the question is no, although I did note the two members speaking. (4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
(4) Given my answer to the third part of the question was negative, my answer to part 4 is also no. The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I give the call to Hon Barry House. Hon Paddy Embry may make a personal explanation, but it is not a point of order; in which case, I suggest it is appropriate to do it at the end of question time rather than interrupt question time.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.