House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Parliamentary Procedure Parliamentary Procedure Member's Remarks MEMBER'S REMARKS The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER (15:42): Earlier today during debate on the Local Government (Road Closures—1934 Act) Amendment Bill, there were a series of points of order and I advised the house that I would review the Hansard transcript, as at the time I was unable to hear what the member for Croydon had said due to noise coming from both sides of the house. Having had the opportunity to read the Hansard, it is clear that the member for Adelaide objected to comments made by the member for Croydon that the member for Adelaide's contribution on a previous debate was vindictive and that the claim made by the member for Adelaide was: ...false when she made it or was recklessly indifferent to whether it was true or false at the time she made it and, funnily enough, that is exactly the reason that the federal opposition is trying to put Craig Thomson before the Privileges Committee... In response to the member for Adelaide's objection at the time in relation to the use of the word 'vindictive', I ruled that it was not unparliamentary. However, I invited the member for Croydon to withdraw it, but he declined. As to the reference to Craig Thomson, the words are not unparliamentary. While the member for Adelaide may object, there is no requirement on the member for Croydon (in standing orders) to withdraw those words. Having said that, the member for Croydon would know that allegations of deliberately misleading the house have to be made by substantive motion. If the member for Adelaide feels she has been misrepresented by the comments made by the member for Croydon, she can always seek leave to make a personal explanation, or rebut any statements in reply when the matter is next called on. I will leave it at that.