Page 3224 - Week 11 - Thursday, 13 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
today, and I think we are all agreed that the way it is worded is not, I think, the way it was intended. I applaud the Chief Minister's suggestion that we should have contact with the Federal Parliament and see whether there is any way in which those provisions which are odious to us can be removed.
I can assure members of the Opposition that this Government does not intend, or is not trying, to stifle the use of private members' business or the introduction of private members' Bills. I am saying this in a truly bipartisan approach. Clearly the health of this Assembly relies upon active and supportive private members' business being introduced into the house. I have read with interest comments by Mr Connolly and, of course, views put by the Government Law Office. It seems that our hands are tied. It seems that, no matter what our hearts may wish to do, our heads tell us that we have to withdraw this Bill.
MR COLLAERY (Attorney-General) (12.20), in reply: Mr Speaker, I think something should be made clear to the house, certainly to those waiting, and that is that standing order 170 says:
Every bill not prepared according to the standing orders shall be ordered to be withdrawn.
You called upon me as leader of business in the house to respond to your ruling. If I do that, Mr Speaker, I either stay in my seat and it is a vote of no confidence in you - and most parliamentary practice indicates very clearly what the result would be for you, and I say that with respect - or I respond to your ruling and stand and move that the Bill be withdrawn. I think it was obvious to everyone in the house today that this is very clear. I did it as I have done before, and the record will show that on moving that motion I did not speak to it. My very strong view is that either this Assembly follows established Westminster parliamentary practice or we bring the Assembly into disrepute.
I have supported your ruling, Mr Speaker - a ruling about which I was not aware until you made it, and I believe that was evident to everyone in the chamber. I have supported it. Following my support for that ruling I have been faced with the situation as leader of Government business in the house where, Mr Speaker, you have supported a motion calling for this motion that I have moved in deference to your ruling to be adjourned, on the argument of Mr Berry, for further legal advice.
This leaves the Government in a very difficult position. We do not wish to pre-empt that legal advice that clearly, Mr Speaker, in your support for the motion you now intend to seek. The choice available to me as leader of Government business in the house is to invite you, with great respect, either to withdraw your ruling and the implicit request that I move the motion that the Bill be
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .