Page 2568 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 8 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
believe that the House of Representatives standing orders he has mentioned can also be read in conjunction with standing order 94, so if any alterations were intended to our standing orders to cover moving dissent, members should take that into account because that is something that they might not want to adopt holus-bolus, as it were. That is the provision for a closure of a member, which, perhaps, members might not want. But I think it is something that perhaps the Standing Committee on Administration and Procedures and, indeed, other interested members might like to take on board because it is a valid point.
Mr Berry has three options here, given that I am against him on his point of order. He can seek leave of this Assembly to debate the issue of dissent in relation to the two Bills and my ruling on those. That is open to him if the Assembly wishes to give leave for that. Accordingly, he could also seek to suspend so much of standing orders as would enable him to debate the motion. Thirdly, he can give formal notice of the motion and that can be debated in the usual way. But I adhere to the previous ruling of the Speaker in June in relation to the motion of dissent without notice. That is my ruling.
Mr Moore: I raise a point of order, Mr Acting Speaker. I draw your attention to standing order 275. You have referred to House of Representatives standing orders. In fact, No. 275 refers to the prevailing practice of the House of Representatives of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia and whilst I accept that the prevailing practice is represented in the parliamentary standing orders, Mr Berry has clearly quoted from House of Representatives Practice and I do not think, at this stage, you have given an adequate explanation as to why you have, in effect, overruled that and overruled standing order 275.
MR ACTING SPEAKER: It was done on the basis of precedents in this chamber. I think I have explained, Mr Moore. I am against you on that. I do regard the issue as important; I think it is something that probably should be formally cleared up. We are developing our own practice and I feel that is important. There is no specific provision in our standing orders for dissent and, accordingly, that is why I made the ruling I did.
Mr Berry: I think this might assist. I seek leave to move a motion of dissent from the chairman's ruling.
MR ACTING SPEAKER: I see nothing wrong with that, Mr Berry, if you wish to so move.
Leave granted.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .