Page 40 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 27 November 2012

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

of the debate in relation to that bill so that members are familiar with them and indeed can be briefed by the government’s officials on the proposed amendments. In contrast, we have often seen amendments coming from the opposition very late, often minutes before a bill is brought on for debate. As Mr Rattenbury observed quite accurately, that does not make for good lawmaking. So this is a provision that seeks to impose some discipline on all members in that regard.

Finally, it is worth observing, of course, that the practice of question time occurring at 2.30 was the practice of this place from the commencement of self-government until 2008. It was a practice that was adopted by governments of all persuasions and it was adopted for good reason: to reflect the fact that often members will be engaged in functions, commitments and meetings during the lunch break on a sitting day. Far from simply taking two hours to eat a sandwich, members are frequently out in their electorates attending functions or meetings. They often have to travel and that travel time plus the attendance at the function was curtailed with the 1½ hours that was allocated for the luncheon suspension. Therefore a return to the two hours provides for members to do that work, and to do it reasonably, safely and efficiently, and still be able to return in time for question time. Members opposite know that. If they are not out working during the lunch break, that is a matter for them. But those are the facts.

Members interjecting—

MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Corbell, could you resume your seat for a moment. Stop the clock, please. Would members stop having yelling matches across the chamber. I cannot hear a word Mr Corbell is saying anymore, so he will be heard in silence for the remainder of what he has to say.

MR CORBELL: I commend my amendments to the Assembly.

Ordered that the question be divided.

Amendment 1 agreed to.

Question put:

That amendment 2 be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 9

Noes 8

Mr Barr

Ms Gallagher

Mr Coe

Mr Seselja

Ms Berry

Mr Gentleman

Mr Doszpot

Mr Smyth

Dr Bourke

Ms Porter

Mrs Dunne

Mr Wall

Ms Burch

Mr Rattenbury

Mr Hanson

Mr Corbell

Mrs Jones

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

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