1. Home
  2. Hansard & Papers
  3. Legislative Assembly
  4. 15 October 2003
Contact Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

Consideration of Urgent Motions

Printing Tips | Print selected text | Full Day Hansard Transcript         « Prior Item | Item 22 of 47 | Next Item »

About this Item
Subjects -  Law Reform; Federal Government; Company Law; Crime; Shootings
Speakers - Tripodi Mr Joseph; Debnam Mr Peter; Speaker
Business - Consideration of Urgent Motion
Commentary - Procedural debate to determine precedence


    CONSIDERATION OF URGENT MOTIONS
Page: 3909


    Federal Government Corporate Law Reform Package

    Mr JOSEPH TRIPODI (Fairfield—Parliamentary Secretary) [3.40 p.m.]: Earlier today I gave notice that I would seek to have this matter considered urgently because New South Wales shareholders are at risk. They are at risk because the Federal Treasurer continues to put the interests of shareholders at the bottom of the heap. This matter is urgent because the Federal Parliament is due to debate a new round of important reforms that will set the direction for how corporations conduct their activities. The Federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, has adopted Federal Labor's proposal to give shareholders a non-binding vote on executive remuneration policy. However, the Howard Government has failed to tackle some of the worst practices leading to corporate excess. This matter is urgent because we need to protect shareholders from what has been a litany of corporate excess and collapses. We need a robust regulatory framework that will ensure that boards are accountable and that shareholders are empowered.

    Fairfield Area Shooting Incidents

    Mr PETER DEBNAM (Vaucluse) [3.41 p.m.]: My urgent motion calls on the House to note the Carr Government's failure to adopt a crime-fighting strategy which would stop ongoing gun warfare on the streets of south-west Sydney. My motion is urgent because the constituents of the electorate of Fairfield are at risk. Time and time again, day after day, shootings, armed robberies, kneecappings, drive-by shootings and murders are being committed in south-west Sydney. This afternoon I put an urgent question to the Minister for Police and it was not answered. Debating my motion would give the Government an opportunity to debate this issue and explain on the record whether Deputy Commissioner Madden—

    Mr Steve Whan: Point of order: My point of order is relevance. The Opposition should be justifying its reasons for urgency. The honourable member should be saying why his motion should receive urgent consideration rather than refer to a question he asked in question time today.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have not heard sufficient of the honourable member's contribution to make a decision on the point of order.

    Mr PETER DEBNAM: Apart from the question I put to the Government today, which is an urgent question on behalf of everybody in New South Wales, this morning on radio 2ME the widow of Ali Abdul-Razak said the Government's family feud suggestion is a beat-up. What is really happening is that crime is out of control.

    Mr Matt Brown: Point of order: The honourable member for Vaucluse must say why his matter is urgent. He is discussing a radio interview this morning and I do not see how that goes to the issue of whether his motion is urgent.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have not heard sufficient of the contribution of the honourable member for Vaucluse to determine whether he is in order. The honourable member may continue.

    Mr PETER DEBNAM: This matter is urgent because the widow of somebody who was executed six weeks ago in front of the Lakemba mosque said on radio this morning that this was not a family feud, that it is about crime escalating out of control. The honourable member for Fairfield should agree to debate my motion because it affects his constituents.

    Mr Joseph Tripodi: Point of order: The honourable member is misleading the House. The Government has already announced its response to the hand gun legislation. The Opposition is trying to beat this up into—

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order.

    Mr PETER DEBNAM: My motion is urgent because the investigating police want to know why the Government refused to give them electronic surveillance last week and then belatedly approved it after the two murders yesterday morning. The community in New South Wales, especially the community in the electorate of the honourable member for Fairfield, wants to debate this issue and other shootings and murders.

    Mr Alan Ashton: Point of order: Mr Speaker, you have ruled on this matter several times but the honourable member does not seem to be getting the message. The purpose of an urgency debate is for the Opposition to say why its motion is more urgent than the Government's motion.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard sufficient on the point of order. The honourable member for Vaucluse is putting his case as to why his motion should receive priority in an appropriate fashion.

    Mr PETER DEBNAM: The constituents also want to know whether other homes in that street were sprayed with gunfire yesterday? The constituents want to know whether the strike forces had sufficient resources before the murders yesterday morning? The constituents want to know whether six detectives were added yesterday and whether in another knee-jerk movement another six detectives were added today? The constituents want to know where these strike forces came from? Who signed off on them? Who formulated the terms of reference? What are the terms of reference? But, mostly, the widow of Ali Abdul-Razak wants to know why the Government is putting out spin about a family feud and a child custody matter when clearly crime is escalating out of control? [Time expired.]

    Question—That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Fairfield be proceeded with—put.

    The House divided.

    Ayes, 49
    Ms Allan
    Mr Amery
    Ms Andrews
    Mr Bartlett
    Ms Beamer
    Mr Black
    Mr Brown
    Ms Burney
    Miss Burton
    Mr Campbell
    Mr Collier
    Mr Corrigan
    Mr Crittenden
    Ms D'Amore
    Mr Debus
    Mr Gaudry
    Mr Gibson
    Mr Greene
    Ms Hay
    Mr Hickey
    Mr Hunter
    Ms Judge
    Ms Keneally
    Mr Knowles
    Mr Lynch
    Mr McBride
    Mr McLeay
    Ms Meagher
    Ms Megarrity
    Mr Mills
    Mr Morris
    Mr Newell
    Ms Nori
    Mr Orkopoulos
    Mrs Paluzzano
    Mr Pearce
    Mrs Perry
    Mr Price
    Dr Refshauge
    Ms Saliba
    Mr Sartor
    Mr Scully
    Mr Shearan
    Mr Tripodi
    Mr West
    Mr Whan
    Mr Yeadon
      Tellers,
      Mr Ashton
      Mr Martin
      Noes, 37
      Mr Aplin
      Mr Armstrong
      Mr Barr
      Ms Berejiklian
      Mr Cansdell
      Mr Constance
      Mr Debnam
      Mr Draper
      Mr Fraser
      Mrs Hancock
      Mr Hartcher
      Mr Hazzard
      Ms Hodgkinson
      Mrs Hopwood
      Mr Humpherson
      Mr Kerr
      Mr McGrane
      Mr Merton
      Ms Moore
      Mr Oakeshott
      Mr O'Farrell
      Mr Page
      Mr Piccoli
      Mr Pringle
      Mr Richardson
      Mr Roberts
      Ms Seaton
      Mrs Skinner
      Mr Slack-Smith
      Mr Souris
      Mr Stoner
      Mr Tink
      Mr Torbay
      Mr J. H. Turner
      Mr R. W.Turner
        Tellers,
        Mr George
        Mr Maguire
        Question resolved in the affirmative.


      Last modified 05/12/2007 16:32:23   :   Update this page