Page 87 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 8 April 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
STANDING ORDERS - MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
MR CORNWELL (11.07): I move:
That standing order 79 (relating to matters of public importance) be amended by omitting "A Member" and substituting "Two Members".
This relates to matters of public importance and my intention is to amend standing order 79 so that it will require two members, not one, to have a matter of public importance debated by this Assembly. In other words, the support of two members for a matter of public importance will be needed. It will, of course, remain up to Madam Speaker, if there are a number of MPIs for consideration, to make a choice as to which one is to be debated.
I said last night in my maiden speech that I thought the previous Assembly was something of an aberration. Indeed, this was one aspect of it that I found, frankly, puzzling; that is, that one person could put up a matter of public importance. Even in the old advisory assembly, at least four people, possibly half a dozen people, were required to support an MPI before the matter could be debated. I may say that on occasions the person putting up a topic found that they did not receive the support of that number of people, and therefore the matter of public importance did not proceed.
I think I should advise the Assembly that this requirement that more than one person put up an MPI is followed elsewhere in Australian parliaments. The Commonwealth, for example, of 148 members, requires eight people, including the proposer, before an MPI can be debated. In Victoria the proposer plus 12 people, out of a total of 88 members, have to stand in the chamber before an MPI can come up. In the Northern Territory, which is closer in numbers to this Assembly of 17 - the Northern Territory has 25, as members would be aware - they require five people of 25, in other words, 20 per cent of their members, to support a matter of public importance coming forward.
Mr Kaine: Your maths are on the mark, "Minister for Education".
MR CORNWELL: Thank you. At least we do not have a numeracy problem. I do not know about literacy. It seems to me, therefore, that it is not unreasonable for this Assembly of 17 members to require - - -
Mr Berry: It is all right for primary school.
MR CORNWELL: At least I will be better on the numeracy than your bed numbers are, Mr Berry. I do not think it is unreasonable that this Assembly of 17 members should require two members to support an MPI coming before at least the consideration of Madam Speaker. In 1991 there were, in fact, some 32 matters of public importance debated in this Assembly.
Mr De Domenico: How many, Greg?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .