Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time St Clair Land Swap ST CLAIR LAND SWAP The Hon. DAVID WINDERLICH Legislative Council ST CLAIR LAND SWAP The Hon. DAVID WINDERLICH (15:17): The council's decision is the subject of a rescission motion. How can the council forward the proposal until it has finalised its consideration, which it cannot do until it has considered the rescission motion? The proposal is the subject of a rescission motion being considered by council on the 23^rd: how can the council forward a proposal until it has dealt with the rescission motion? The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Energy ST CLAIR LAND SWAP The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Energy) (15:18): I would imagine that it will deal with the rescission motion first. I find the hypocrisy of the honourable member extraordinary. He left this chamber when there was important legislative work underway. We were passing a bill, but he left the chamber to go down to the local council of Burnside, barge in and lodge himself in the chamber, whilst important legislation was being considered in this place, which he missed out on. He should work on performing his responsibilities and duties for the work that he is paid to do. It is outrageous behaviour. It is completely undignified. He is party to a whole range of decisions that various sectors of this community would strongly, emotionally and passionately disagree with. How would he feel if they barged into this chamber and lodged themselves on the floor blowing whistles? It is a disgrace; it undermines the dignity of the office, and that is what this honourable member is about. He does not value local government at all. He is disdainful of local government. These people are democratically elected officials who work extremely hard. They are the backbone of our community, and most of the work they do is voluntary. He is, supposedly, a dignified member of parliament, yet he charged down there and into the chamber whilst he should have been doing the work of parliament—an important bill was put through that day. It is disgraceful behaviour. He talks about conflict of interest. He presented himself to the electors as a Democrat and was elected to the council as a Democrat—and then he dumped them. It is disgraceful behaviour. So, the answer to the question is quite simple: I would imagine that, if it is important to council to consider the rescission motion first, it will do so.