Business of the House



About this Item
SpeakersAquilina Mr John; O'Dea Mr Jonathan
BusinessBusiness of the House, Suspension of Orders


BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Page: 23731

Suspension of Standing Orders: Extension of Speaking Time

Mr JOHN AQUILINA (Riverstone—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.13 p.m.]: I move:
      That standing orders be suspended to restore the full speaking time in reply of the member for Shellharbour.
Mr JONATHAN O'DEA (Davidson) [4.13 p.m.]: Such a motion will set a dangerous precedent. A quorum is designed to get an adequate number of members in the Chamber. If the member for Shellharbour attracts no attention or interest from her own side, why should we restore the time of her speech? I can understand that all those Labor members who were not in the Chamber did not want to listen to such dribble, but the standing orders of this House legitimately allow for a quorum to be called. For the Leader of the House to move a motion directly contradicting the effect of that standing order will set a dangerous precedent, and it should not be allowed.

Mr Daryl Maguire: Besides, she is full of dribble!

Mr JONATHAN O'DEA: It is not as though we were hearing anything of great merit. It was absolute dribble. We have heard enough from the member for Shellharbour. She has wasted the time of the House through repeated interjections that had very little or no substance.

Mr Daryl Maguire: And she has been disorderly.

Mr JONATHAN O'DEA: She has been disorderly. She continues to interject and offend people. I strongly suggest that we continue with this debate in the normal course, without allowing a suspension of standing orders and restoring the member's speaking time.

Mr JOHN AQUILINA (Riverstone—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.15 p.m.], in reply: The member for Davidson cannot make a judgement on the value of the contribution of the member for Shellharbour. Members have a right to listen to the member for Shellharbour and she has a right to have the full time as allowed under the standing orders for her contribution. The Opposition knows it used a political stunt to cut back the speaking time of the member, obviously because it did not want to hear her valid points. It is only right that the member for Shellharbour is given the full time to make her points to drive down the relevant and pertinent reasons why her motion should be agreed to.

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.