Mr McMullan —I rise on a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Prior to that series of resolutions and divisions, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition sought your indulgence to respond to the statement which the minister had made under indulgence. There was a point of order raised to say that there was no entitlement to indulgence to respond when a minister had added to an answer, which in fact is not what occurred. You upheld that ruling for some reason, which I do not quite understand, but the fact of the matter is that indulgence is at your discretion; it is not a question of a point of order.

Mr McMULLAN —No. That was not what was sought nor what was granted, nor what was sought by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Mr Deputy Speaker Hawker, the point of order of the Minister for Forestry and Conservation which you upheld was quite wrong. There is a discretion for you to give the Deputy Leader of the Opposition the option to respond. You just cannot rule it out of order; you have to exercise that discretion. He has sought it and you should consider whether you wish to grant it, and I believe you should grant it.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —The member for Fraser has made his point of order. It is true that indulgence was granted to the minister and indulgence was not granted to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition chose then to use other forms of the House, which he exercised.