Thursday, 3 September 2020
That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business from moving the following motion immediately—That the House:
(1) notes that:
(a) thanks to this Prime Minister, members opposite have voted more times to shut down debate than they have voted on legislation;
(b) if the government cuts short debate on the next bill to be announced, it will be the second time this week that the Prime Minister has shut down debate on a bill of critical importance; and
(c) this Prime Minister has a disdain for democratic debate; and
(2) invites the Prime Minister to remain in the chamber and make a statement on this matter.
The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. I'm just going to say to the Manager of Opposition Business that I didn't have the text of his last motion but I listened to it very closely. There is a difference between a same-question rule and a same-motion rule. On hearing that, it—apart from a word or two being changed—did not change the substance of the motion. That's certainly the case with the motion he put earlier. Obviously, when it comes to the House, the Manager of Opposition Business has a right to move motions but not to move motions that are essentially the same. I'm happy to hear from him.
The first thing that I'd raise is that, given the occurrence of it being 4:30 and the question of the adjournment being put, you never had the opportunity to seek a seconder. Therefore, the question has never been in the possession of the House.
I think that's a reasonable point, but what I'm foreshadowing—and I'm well aware of that; the House has not made a decision on it—is that the House is about to make a decision on the motion that is moved. But there is also not a capacity to move endless motions to prevent business coming on. But I will allow this one—you're on. I'll allow this one and then I will be calling the clerk.