Page 3931 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 9 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Stevenson: There are two sections.
MR BERRY: Yes. I should speak about Mr Stevenson's amendment first. I think it would be unfair of us to impose on the next Assembly a condition like that. That is the Government view. We would be setting a standard for the next Assembly which, I am sure, they would want to set themselves. In relation to the life of this Assembly, it is our business to determine the way forward. We have always had the power to complete debate or not complete debate, and to go on with the passage of a Bill in accordance with the wishes of the numbers in the chamber from time to time. That has been a desirable piece of flexibility which members have coped with fairly well along the way. Sometimes, not everybody is happy; but that is the nature of the chamber. I do not think that Mr Stevenson has offered convincing arguments for doing away with existing procedures and putting in place an inflexible formula. I think that would stifle the way in which we do business here. On the issue of creating urgency around Bills, I think that is just an overlay of another administrative problem that we would have to deal with in the chamber, and we do not need to do that. At the end of the day, we always have to deal with things in accordance with the wishes of the majority in the chamber.
Members would be aware of the Government business meetings which we have before each sitting period. We meet with all Independents and groupings within the Assembly to sort out the proposed business for the forthcoming sitting. From time to time, Bills are put off as a result of that meeting or they are put off in the lead-up to that meeting because of consultation between my office and others about particular issues. Over time, my office has developed a bit of an understanding of how people operate in the Assembly and what we might expect from them in relation to the passage of Bills, and we try to satisfy all the needs of members in the Assembly as far as we can. From time to time the Government says, "We have a Bill that we want to get through". It is up to us then to convince members that it can be allowed to pass. If we go through the Government business meeting and set in place a business paper that nobody wants, it would be a very short sitting week. We could go home very early. On some of these long nights, it is a tactic for which I have some compassion.
I think we are fairly flexible in relation to these matters. Just look at some of the statistics. Of the 27 Bills passed by the Assembly in the last three sitting weeks, about half - 13 - were introduced more than three months ago, and six of the remainder were introduced at least two months earlier. So, I do not think you could create a picture of things being rushed through inappropriately. I think the situation that we have developed, of providing exposure drafts, is another good point. The Government generally performs in accordance with the principles on which Mr Stevenson based his proposal; but I think that what he has attempted to put in place would take away a useful flexibility in the chamber.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .