Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 1 Hansard (22 February) . . Page.. 161 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

For those reasons, I think we need to look at whether there are any other standing orders which might be able to be crafted and which might allow for the Assembly to be regarded quite differently from the rest of the chamber. For example, it seems to me that, if there is some upset in the chamber as a whole which threatens somebody with imminent danger, perhaps the Speaker must act quickly. There was no such danger yesterday. If there is some sort of a fracas in the chamber, that is a matter for the attendants to sort out. If the Assembly can proceed when there is a disagreement in the chamber while attendants deal with it, it should proceed. That is the point that I think needs to be thought about in the course of consideration of this issue.

I think that for the Government to pretend that something happened yesterday that would cause concern shows them to be turning a deliberate blind eye to the issue, and I think that is unfortunate. No, Mr Speaker, I did not say that you made the decision on the basis of Mrs Carnell's signals. I merely drew attention to the fact that she was making the signals. I think the people in the chamber could quite fairly come to a conclusion that something was amiss. In all of those circumstances, I would welcome the opportunity to look at this group of standing orders. Hopefully, we can come up with an interpretation of those standing orders which people can tolerate or think is appropriate; otherwise, some new standing orders might be drafted which would cater for consideration of various occurrences within the chamber.

Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, could I take a point of order under standing order 47 to explain a couple of words that I think have been misunderstood? We have been talking about the words "chamber", "gallery" and "Assembly". It seems to me, Mr Speaker, that the term "Assembly", from the way all the standing orders are crafted, covers the whole area; the word "chamber" this area, and the word "gallery" that area. When we are talking about standing order 207 and the word "Assembly", that would be my interpretation of it. If members look at standing order 206, it distinguishes between "chamber", "gallery" and "Assembly". It becomes much more obvious where the Speaker does have control in terms of the Assembly. That is an interesting point for members to keep in mind.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Training) (11.06): This is an interesting point. As a former Deputy Speaker, like Ms McRae is now, I have some knowledge of the tradition in relation to parliaments and what is acceptable behaviour and what has happened in the past. I would strongly urge the committee members to look to what happens not only in this little parliament but also in other Australian parliaments and other parliamentary democracies in terms of this type of action.

I think there is a fair bit of hypocrisy in this motion by Ms McRae. I doubt very much whether she, as a former Speaker for three years and a Deputy Speaker now, would have acted terribly differently from the way you, Mr Speaker, acted quite properly yesterday. I doubt very much whether Ms McRae, had she been the Speaker, would have tolerated what occurred yesterday.

Ms McRae: That is not the debate, mate. You miss the point.

MR STEFANIAK: No, I do not miss the point at all, Ms McRae. There are certain rules of behaviour in relation to assemblies and parliaments that go back for over a century. If people even clap in the House of Representatives they are evicted.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .