4 November 1980] 212911
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
[Tuesday, 4 November 1980] 212911 (b) a member who speaks after II p.m. on the question "That the House do now Tuesday, 4 November 1980 adjourn" and refers to matters that could be considered as new business, does in fact contravene Standing Order The PRESIDENT (the Hon. Clive Griffiths) No. 117 by not confining his remarks to took the Chair at 4.30 p.m., and read prayers. whether or not the House should adjourn? MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT I respectfully state at the outset that it is not my Dress: Statement by President intention, Mr President, to question your THE PRESIDENT (the Hon. Clive Griffiths): undisputed right to give a decision in this House I wish to announce that in response to requests in regard to Standing Orders; rather it is my received for my consideration concerning the intention to seek a decision on the meaning of relaxation of the convention relating to the several Standing Orders and, in addition, while traditional mode of dress in the House, it is my they are being considered I seek a decision as to intention to Permit members, should they so whether it may be in the interests of the House to desire, to remove their coats during sittings should amend the Standing Orders concerned to make the atmospheric conditions in my opinion warrant their intentions quite clear. 1 know when you were such modification of the convention. elected President of the House you inherited the When it is considered that the conditions practice of members spaking on the motion warrant the change, it is my intention to indicate "That the House do now adjourn"; but since this my approval by placing an advice to this effect on practice was first introduced I believe it has gone the notice boards of the House. far beyond a matter of reasonable debate. It is also in order for members to wear safari One could not object to debate on the question suits in the House should they so desire, providing "That the House do now adjourn" if it were that when shirts are worn with this form of dress, confined strictly to the question. However, on ties are worn also. recent occasions not one of the members who have taken advantage of the opportunity to speak on this motion has even referred to the question LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL before the Chair. I would refer to page 1927 of PHOTOGRAPHS Hansard No. s where the Hon. A. A. Lewis spoke Australian Broadcasting Commission: Statement on the adjournment motion and did not mention by President anything about the question before the House. He THE PRESIDENT (the H-on. Clive Griffiths): started by saying "I do not wish to delay the The Australian Broadcasting Commission sought House for any length of time.-. .", but at no time my approval to take some still photographs of this did he mention the question before the Chair. Chamber some time during the afternoon for the The same thing happened in respect of a purpose of using them as backdrops to its news number of speeches made on the adjournment sessions associated with this House of Parliament. motion on 8 October. On that occasion a number I granted approval for that. of members spoke for quite some time, not one of whom The Hon. D. K. Dans: Photographing is still mentioned the question before the House. very appropriate. Again, on 22 October, at page 2465 onwards of Hansard No. I11we find that some six members The PRESIDENT: Order! spoke, and not one of them mentioned the motion before the House. STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE I wonder why the members of the early Consideration of Adjournment Debate: Motion Legislative Council in the nineteenth century THE HON. N. E. BAXTER (Central) j4.54 framed the question which has been in use ever p.m.]: I move- since, and a question that is used not only in the House of Representatives and the Senate in the That the Standing Orders Committee at Commonwealth Parliament, but also in another its next meeting consider whether- place in this State. What significance did the (a) Standing Order No. 88 confines a members of the early Legislative Council place on member to strictly debate the question the word "now" when they included it in the "That the House do now adjourn" only, motion? Surely there must have been some or is'a member permitted to speak on specific reason for its inclusion. They must have whatever subject he may choose; and meant at that time that the adjournment of the 2912 2912COUNCIL] House should take place as soon as possible after The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: If the honourable the movement of the motion. member would listen, perhaps he would learn If one looks at any dictionary-it does not from somebody who has been here for many years matter which one-one Finds the word "now" and who, for I I years, was Chairman of means "at the present time". Therefore, when the Committees in this Chamber. One would think he Leader of the House or any Other Minister was the only one who knew anything about tbe deputising for him rises and moves the motion Standing Orders. He is one of the clever, smart- "That the House do now adjourn" it means the alecky lawyers who come in here thinking they House should adjourn at that time, not one hour know something about everything. Let him listen and 46 minutes later, and not 56 minutes later. In for a while, and learn something for a change. fact at present there is a possibility that the The Hon. Peter Dowding interjected. House could still be sitting at 4.30 the following The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: I am almost old afternoon, if the members of a party attempted to enough to be his grandfather, and I am still filibuster. learning. The Leader of the House could rise to his feet The PRESIDENT: Order! at, say, 10.00 p.m., to move the motion, and if The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: members of the Opposition each spoke for about I was referring to three hours the House still would be sitting in the Standing Order No. 88, which reads as follows- following afternoon. 88. No Member shall digress from the The Hon. Peter Dowding: Is there any evidence subject matter of any Question under that has happened, or are you just making it up? discussion; nor anticipate the discussion of any subject which appears on the Notice The H-on. G. E. Masters: I can't hear you! Paper. The Hon. N. E, BAXTER: What a stupid How many members have addressed themselves statement. to the subject matter, "That the House do now The Hon. P. H. Lockyer: From a stupid adjourn"? If members refer to the speeches made member. on this question on Wednesday, 8 October, they The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: We know that a find that the speeches went for one hour 40 member spoke in this Chamber for over four minutes. hours on one occasion. The Hon. R. Hetherington; Terrible! The Hon. Peter Dowding: Has it happened this The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: As I said before, session? not one of those speeches referred to the question The Hon. J. M. Berinson: On the adjournment before the House. There was no attempt to debate motion? the question before the House. The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: I do not care what On 22 October 1980, the speeches on the session it has happened in. adjournment motion lasted 56 minutes. The Hon. D. K. Dans: It certainly was not on The Hon. R. Hetherington: Your motion wipes the adjournment. out the Budget debate, does it not? The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: Seven members indulged themselves on completely unimportant The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: A filibuster could issues. take place. Filibusters have happened in Parliaments all over the world. There is no use in The Hon. D. K. Dans: Who is the judge of members saying anything different. that? The Hon. H. W. Olney: What happens if the The PRESIDENT: Order! motion is lost? You do not go home; you keep on The Hon. J. M. Berinson: That was the night sitting? Mr Pike spoke, I believe. The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: Let me deal now The PRESIDENT: Order! with Standing Order Na. 88. The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: it was absolutely The Hon. Peter Dowding: What are you without profit, as far as I am concerned. What frightened of? was the purpose of all that talking? The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: I am not frightened The Hon. D. K. Dans: What is the purpose of of anything. half the talking within the Standing Orders? The PRESIDENT: Order! The PRESIDENT: Order! [Tuesday, 4 November 1980] 291391 The Hon. R. G. Pike: Fancy bringing politics The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: A real Irish stew of into this place! subjects. The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: What a ridiculous The Hon. Peter Dowding: Isn't that terrible? situation this House has come to- How awful! The Hon. R. Hetherington: Because we bring The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: Of course it is party politics into the Chamber? terrible. The Hon. D. K. Dans: I agree with that last The PRESIDENT: Order! statement. The Hon. Peter Dowding: It is an iniquity that The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: -when not one we discussed such issues. member mentions the question before the Chair. The Hon. N. E. BAXTER: It is an iniquity that Surely Standing Order No. 88 was framed so that members thrust those issues on the House.