Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National): Well when we look back on this period—a tawdry sordid period in this Parliament led by this disgrace of a Speaker—I think we will look back with shame. That 10-minute contribution from the Minister responsible for the Parliamentary Service will be probably the thing that sinks him as the Speaker. Because I do not believe anyone watching the Parliament tonight could look at that display of petulance and contempt and hate for both me and Parliament actually and consider that he is appropriate to continue in the role.Let's be very clear about what's just happened here: the Minister responsible for the Parliamentary Service has used privilege to show that the settlement he reached with the plaintiff is not worth the paper it's written on because the settlement that was reached last year and released to this Parliament apologises for what he said and the matter is settled. In fact the Speaker came before—eventually came before—the Governance and Administration Committee and said that he intended to say no more about it. Well what we now have in May 2021 is the Speaker turning up at 8 o'clock at night and using privilege parliamentary privilege—a sacred a sacrosanct right—in order to re-litigate what happened in May 2019 or before. Let's just be very clear about that. My challenge to the Minister in charge is say those words outside this Chamber because what people watching need to know tonight is that he has privilege in this Chamber and so do I and we are protected from defamation law by what we say here. But he is not protected on the tiles of Parliament. He is not protected by what he says in the media if he repeats those comments. So my challenge to the Speaker is to go and say those words outside this House. I'm willing to say that he will not do that. And what does that say? Says it all.So let's be very clear about what's happened. The Minister has used privilege to re-litigate what happened. And we've got a lot of stuff about I believe the police"—and you know—"I believe the police and I believe the internal investigation and I believe the parliamentary process that we went through." And he says don't believe me. Well all I'm doing is litigating the settlement that he agreed to. There was a settlement and he told me in select committee that he knew within 24 hours that what he said was wrong. He said that he was going to be here all night and get to the questions that I asked. Well we look forward to that because they were not addressed. The question of why when he knew within 24 hours he did not admit he was wrong and say so was not addressed. The question of why legal letters went back and forward between the plaintiff and the defendant in which Mr Mallard said he would plead truth and prove that what he said was right about rape that was not addressed. The question of why he said he would do it vigorously and put the man's reputation on the line that was not addressed either. Those are critical issues because they go to judgment. Leave aside all of the defamatory stuff that the Minister just said in relation to me in particular most of which was wrong—leave aside all of that—this is a very simple issue. He knew he was wrong but he fought for 18 months at vast taxpayer expense to fight it.The reality is that's what a bully does; that's not what a Speaker of the Parliament does particularly not a Speaker who's meant to be overseeing Francis Review reforms into improving the culture of Parliament. And how can we have confidence on this side of the House in someone who does that at the same time as they're meant to be improving the conduct of the Parliament? The reality is we can't and we don't."