House debates

Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Bills

National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2); First Reading

6:00 pm

Photo of Tony SmithTony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Hansard source

I will just say to the member for Melbourne that he hasn't got the call at the moment, so no-one is hearing what he's saying. I've been following proceedings, and there are two issues. One was the allocation of the call. I say to the Deputy Speaker that he needs to call the person who he believes rose first. I've heard his explanation for that and I don't think that's at issue. If the member for Melbourne finds that an issue, there is ample precedence where the government can take responsibility for a bill such as this. I could go through them at great length, which I don't think I need to do.

Once the question is then stated, the member for Melbourne is entitled to move an amendment, which I understand he has done. At that point the motion can be moved that the question be put. I heard the member for Melbourne say—and I think that he obviously believes this to be the case—that the Deputy Speaker should be calling for a seconder. That's not the case, because the question before the chair isn't the amendment. It's well written up in the Practice. I'm happy to take the member for Melbourne through it; in fact, the opposition has been in exactly this predicament many times. Until an amendment is moved, seconded and then stated and before the House, the motion that the Leader of the House moved is quite right. It does seem like a steamroller, but that's how the standing orders are.

In order not to detain the House, I was watching carefully in my office. I'm happy to be corrected, but the motion before the House was the amendment moved by the member for Melbourne. Whilst it might surprise the member for Melbourne, the Leader of the House is quite entitled to put the motion 'that the motion be put' at any time through member for Melbourne's speech, at any time through any seconder's speech, at any time up until the question before the House is 'that the amendment be agreed to', and we're nowhere near that. I'll hear from the member for Melbourne.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.