Page 693 - Week 03 - Thursday, 21 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
presentation of committee reports with a fixed reporting date, a motion to give a member leave of absence, and a motion of referral for a privilege matter that has been granted precedence. I repeat that I have no objections to those exclusions.
I further agree with the recommendation by the Administration and Procedures Committee that that committee should order Assembly business, in the interests of the Assembly, and not, as was previously the case, the Executive determining the order of the Assembly business. I say this because it is clear that Assembly business is a matter for the Assembly, for individual members and certainly not the Executive. So, I support that.
However, I am not at all convinced, Madam Speaker, that we should set aside a special time slot for this Assembly business. I am quite concerned that it is a restrictive proposal, both in terms of the time scale and in terms of the subjects proposed. I believe that 45 minutes, as proposed to be set aside on Thursdays, coming after the presentation of new government legislation, is far too short.
As members are aware, standing orders allow the Government to present new legislation each Thursday morning, and I have no argument with that; but they provide that the Minister introducing such legislation can speak for a maximum of 20 minutes. I know that, at the moment, to suggest that the Government has so much new business that it would take up a significant amount of time on a Thursday morning would be laughable, because we are once again down to a rather flimsy notice paper for the second or third day running.
Mr Lamont: Where is your MPI for today?
MR CORNWELL: It is your business. It is the Government's responsibility to bring legislation to this house and to run this chamber, Mr Lamont, not ours. We are the Opposition. It would be laughable, I say, to imagine that for the moment. But that may not always be the case, Madam Speaker. We can indeed live in hope.
Therefore, it concerns me that if we have a situation of, say, four government Bills coming in and they are of sufficient moment that they require the Minister concerned to speak in each case for 20 minutes - Mr Connolly is quite capable of that; he is very eloquent - we would find that the 45-minute requirement may be restricted; only by five minutes, but it is possible. In any event, the 45 minutes, as I read this report, is in fact the maximum. Again, I believe, it could be far too short when we consider, and this is the important thing, the type of matter of Assembly business which would be discussed. I remind members that this is set out at paragraph 15 of this report. The topics to be included in this limited three-quarters of an hour of Assembly business time include:
any notice of motion or order of the day relating to the establishment or membership of an Assembly committee ...
Members may say that that is not of any great importance; we can deal with that in that 45 minutes. It goes on, however, to say:
or the referral of a matter to an Assembly committee.
This seems to me, members and Madam Speaker, to impinge upon private members' business on a Wednesday morning. If a member wishes to put forward a motion referring a matter to an Assembly committee, perhaps the Social Policy Committee or even the Administration and Procedures Committee, then it cannot
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .