Arch Bevis (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Aviation and Transport Security) Share this | Hansard source

Indeed, as has been pointed out, it may be offensive to some but I would have thought within the confines of standing orders it was at least parliamentary language. In relation to the question of corruption, I understand it is not appropriate to allege corruption against a member. Indeed, the amendment, as submitted, did not refer to ‘a member’; it referred to ‘the government’. Given that it was a second reading amendment which was to be debated and voted upon, if it is not possible to say things of that kind in a second reading amendment which is debated and voted upon, in what circumstances is it appropriate to do that? Truthfully, it seems to me a strange ruling that denied me, on behalf of the opposition, the opportunity to move a set of words in a second reading amendment which, I would have thought, in normal circumstances would have been allowed. If you could elaborate on your earlier ruling, I do not understand why the ‘Howard government’ is an unparliamentary term.

See this speech in context