Legislative Assembly
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
9637 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thursday 2 November 2000 ______ Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Henry Murray) took the chair at 10.00 a.m. Mr Speaker offered the Prayer. CRIMES (SENTENCING PROCEDURE) AMENDMENT (LIFE SENTENCE CONFIRMATION) BILL Second Reading Debate called on. Mr THOMPSON (Rockdale) [10.01 a.m.]: I move: That this debate be now adjourned. Division called for and, pursuant to sessional orders, deferred. PAY-ROLL TAX AMENDMENT (COUNTRY EMPLOYMENT) BILL Second Reading Debate called on. Mr THOMPSON (Rockdale) [10.03 a.m.]: I move: That this debate be now adjourned. Division called for and, pursuant to sessional orders, deferred. JURY AMENDMENT (DISSENTING JUROR) BILL Second Reading Debate called on. Mr THOMPSON (Rockdale) [10.05 a.m.]: I move: That this debate be now adjourned. Division called for and, pursuant to sessional orders, deferred. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Order of Business: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders Mr SPEAKER: Order! To bring forward the matters listed for 11.30 a.m. the Leader of the House may have to move that standing and sessional orders be suspended. Mr Hazzard: Point of order: The standing orders make quite clear that at 11.30 a.m. certain things are to happen, and the Leader of the House cannot now play stupid games. He has taken advice from the Clerks, who are telling him precisely that. He does not know what to do. The Opposition wishes to debate substantive bills in the Parliament, including the bills relating to life sentences, an important matter for the memory of Virginia Morse. It is time that debate came on. Baker should not be allowed out of gaol or to go through these procedures. We should be allowed to debate the matters this morning instead of the Parliament being treated like a chook raffle. 9638 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 2 November 2000 Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Wakehurst will resume his seat. Mr WHELAN (Strathfield—Minister for Police) [10.08 a.m.]: I move: That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow consideration of General Business Order of the Day (General Order) No. 1 and General Business Notices of Motions (General Notices) Nos 1 to 14. Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [10.08 a.m.]: The Leader of the House has made a mockery of the standing and sessional orders because he is seeking to change the routine of business. Mr THOMPSON (Rockdale) [10.08 a.m.]: Mr Speaker— Mr Hartcher: You cannot move the gag. Mr THOMPSON: I withdraw that. Mr HARTCHER: A callover was held yesterday to work out which matters were ready for debate this morning. Honourable members came to the Chamber expecting to debate various bills in the proper sequential order, including the bill involving Mr Crump, payroll tax in country regions and majority verdicts for juries, all important matters before the Parliament. Now, without any warning, the honourable member for Rockdale seeks to prevent debate occurring on each of those matters. Mr Whelan: No. He has adjourned them. Mr HARTCHER: He seeks to prevent debate occurring on each of those three bills, all of which are important, because the Government is afraid that the implications of those bills will impact badly on the Government. Each bill is an electorally popular issue in New South Wales. The Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Life Sentence Confirmation) Bill is a significant bill. When a judge says to a murderer, "You get life and are never to be released," that is to be embodied in statutory form. The Jury Amendment (Dissenting Juror) Bill provides that a jury, in cases involving matters on indictment before the Supreme Court and the District Court, can return a verdict by 11 jurors to stop one individual obstructing the proper deliberation of the jury. The Pay-roll Tax Amendment (Country Employment) Bill seeks to help our country regions to encourage industrial development in those areas by allowing payroll tax concessions in certain appropriate circumstances. These are all important matters of legislation, each of which the honourable member for Rockdale, at the behest of the Leader of the House, seeks to prevent from being debated. Accordingly, the time of the Parliament is being taken up, not with these important bills and not with the important matter of the disgusting antics of the honourable member for Fairfield, but with the more routine matters that have been on the parliamentary notice paper for some time. This is simply an ongoing tactic of the Government to prevent the Parliament from functioning properly. The Government is not interested in matters of serious debate. The Government is not interested, in particular, in the policy initiatives of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition brings before this Parliament two important policy initiatives on law and order: majority verdicts, which is something that is overwhelmingly wanted by the community, and life sentence confirmation for convicted killers who have been told they should never be released, which is also something that is overwhelmingly wanted by the community. These are important policy initiatives by the Leader of the Opposition on law and order. Every member of the community overwhelmingly would support those initiatives. I challenge the Government to fight the Campbelltown by- election on those two issues. Why does this Government not go before the people of Campbelltown and say that if those people are opposed to majority verdicts and life sentence confirmation and if they believe that killers should be allowed out of gaol and that individuals should be allowed to obstruct jury verdicts, then they should not vote Labor. But if they think that killers who are told to stay in gaol should remain in gaol, they should not vote Labor. Let that be a choice that the Labor Party puts before the people of New South Wales during the Campbelltown by-election, which will be held in 2001. The Opposition would be interested to see the voters' verdict. Alternatively, the Government could hold a referendum. Why not have a poll in conjunction with the by-election and ask people their views on Baker and Crump being released and ask their views on majority verdicts? Such a step would be nothing more than seeking the opinion of the people of Campbelltown at a time 2 November 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9639 when a poll is already under way. The results would not be binding and would not involve a referendum, but would be just a gauge of public opinion. Let that be a test of the New South Wales division of the Australian Labor Party. The Coalition does not agree to this motion. When the time comes, the Coalition will vote against it because it is yet another attempt to distort the proper working of the Parliament in the interests of the Government preventing proper debate on the real issues, including the real issue of the disgusting conduct of the honourable member for Fairfield on the night of 14 September. Mr SPEAKER: I understand that the Leader of the House wishes to withdraw the motion. Mr WHELAN (Strathfield—Minister for Police) [10.13 a.m.]: The fact of the matter is that, regrettably, the Clerks have provided the wrong advice, and for that reason the suspension motion will proceed. Question put. Division call for and, pursuant to sessional orders, deferred. HORNSBY ELECTORATE CAPITAL WORKS EXPENDITURE Debate resumed from 4 May. Mr Hartcher: Point of order: My point of order relates to a procedural matter. What has now happened is that the Leader of the House has moved for the suspension of standing orders to enable debate to take place which would otherwise have taken place at 11.30 a.m. Mr Whelan: No. Mr Hartcher: That is what has happened. Mr Whelan: No, that is not correct. Mr Hartcher: The Leader of the House has put that motion. Mr Whelan: That is not correct. Mr Hartcher: The decision of the Leader of the House was challenged and a division will take place. Mr Whelan: The House has made a decision. The fact of the matter is that the honourable member for Hornsby is not in the Chamber and the honourable member for Gosford is filibustering. That is what the honourable member for Gosford is doing. Mr Hartcher: There he is over there. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Hornsby on three calls to order. I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order. Mr Hartcher: Mr Speaker, I am taking a point of order. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Hornsby will cease interrupting. The cross-current of exchanges between members makes it difficult for the honourable member for Gosford to speak to his point of order. The honourable member for Gosford has the call. Mr Hartcher: My point of order is simply this: The only way that motions that the bills to which I have referred can come on for debate is if standing orders are suspended. Whatever the Leader of the House says about what the Clerks should say or should not say is not the issue. The position is that that is the motion that is before the Chair. The decision to proceed has been challenged and that decision is not therefore operative until the challenge is resolved. The division on that challenge does not take place until 10.30 a.m. I therefore put the point of order to you, Mr Speaker, and I ask you to consider it carefully in accordance with proper parliamentary procedure. The point of order means that the procedure cannot be followed until the division has taken place. That is the clear-cut position because the decision of the Leader of the House has not been accepted by the House.