Page 5021 - Week 17 - Tuesday, 11 December 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine: I will move an urgency motion, if you like, and get the thing through in 10 minutes.
MR MOORE: Mr Deputy Speaker, are you still considering that point of order?
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am still considering that, Mr Moore. Chief Minister, I believe that he is within his rights according to standing order 139. He has the right to put any proposed amendment before the Assembly which, for purposes of record, must be in writing and be signed by the mover. I have also taken advice on the matter and he can do it as we go through the debate, even though it is a very lengthy process.
Mr Jensen: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker: I draw your attention to standing order 182. It says that an amendment may not be proposed unless it is in writing and is signed by the mover and copies of the amendment are immediately available for circulation to members.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Jensen, I think that a couple of times, in fact, we have probably short-circuited that by simply voting on the amendment, with the Assembly's consent, before it has been circulated to members, which has speeded up the process, somehow.
MR MOORE: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I believe that I am still speaking to clause 16(4).
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: I thought you had finished. We were waiting on your amendment.
MR MOORE: I was in the process of speaking and had got to the point of saying that I was going to move an amendment when I was rudely interrupted by the Chief Minister on his point of order. No doubt it was a valid attempt by him. I thank you for your protection.
The thing that concerns me here is that, whilst we have no appeals mechanism - and I have to draw attention to that each time because it provides the validity for the individual situations that I am drawing attention to - the notion of allowing a formal error in its full range of meanings is a very broad-ranging power. It is a precedent that is set, not just here. I can clearly see the opportunity some drafters will have of saying, "What a great piece of legislation that is that we got past the Assembly; what a great line it is. We could just put in what will probably become known as the formal error provision and that way we can chop and change things without reference to the Assembly". That is exactly what this is doing. It is incumbent upon us to delete this subclause.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .