Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill

I seek leave for, certainly, myself to take one more call. I have taken a huge interest in this debate from the outset. I was out of Wellington until I returned around 6 o’clock this evening, then I sat on a select committee until 9 o’clock. The moment that select committee concluded I rushed to the Chamber to take calls on this particular part. I have had but one call and on that occasion I addressed the issue around enforcement. I have a number of letters before me from people who have written to me expressing concern around packaging, particularly with regard to cigar displays. I would like the opportunity of leave from the Committee to speak to that, because I think it is an important part of this debate. Certainly, whilst I have been here during the Committee stage this evening nobody has had the opportunity to address the important topic of point of sale.

Leave has been sought. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is objection.

I seek leave for my colleague Jim Peters to make a contribution. Mr Peters is an ex-headmaster. Up until I spoke, which was only a few moments ago, nobody had touched on enforcement officers. Nobody had raised the words even once in the course of this whole debate. My colleague has been seeking the call to talk about the effect of enforcement officers with cameras and videos going into schools. I believe that is a very important point.

The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you, Mr Brown. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.

I seek the leave of the Committee to have one speech on Part 3. I am the ACT health spokesperson. I was on the select committee that heard the submissions and undertook the clause by clause analysis of this bill. I have not had the opportunity to speak on this bill at all this evening. Despite seeking the call at the end of the debate on Part 2, I was not called to speak, and, despite seeking the call for almost an hour and a half, I have not had the opportunity to speak on Part 3 either. I think it is imperative that the health spokesperson for each party has the opportunity to speak. I seek the leave of the Committee to do that.

The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. We now have ourselves in quite a serious difficulty. Normally the Committee would shut down at 5 to 10; the Committee would close, the Speaker would be called back, and you would report progress. However, there is a Standing Order that states that when the Committee has commenced voting, it must conclude the voting before it rises and before you can report progress. What has happened in this case, however, is that you have accepted the closure motion, but we have not started voting. I say to you that therefore we are not in the voting procedure. We do have a question before the Committee, but voting has not yet started. It has not been voted on. The voting procedure has not started. None of the amendments or the parts have been voted on. We are merely in a part that asks whether the closure should take place. You have not yet decided that we should now vote on Part 3, because the Committee has not even made a decision as to whether it accepts the closure. Therefore, we have actually gone past the appropriate time for you to lift the House. It seems to me that, procedurally, you should now tell the Committee that the House is now adjourned, and you should report progress to the Speaker.

The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): It is my recollection that I called that the question be now put, I said: “All those in favour say ‘Aye’.”, and the Government side said “Aye”, then I said: “All those against say ‘No’.”, and those on the other side said “No”. Just as that was done, Mr Peter Dunne took a point of order. So I actually did put the question.

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. There are two points that I would like to raise. First of all, my recollection of the events is exactly as you have just recalled. But I would also like to add the fact that the Speaker, in ruling on this matter on his recall, made it quite clear how this process was to proceed. In my view, the previous speakers have been trifling with the Chair. We have had five requests for leave declined. I move, That the Speaker be further recalled to clarify this matter.

The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): The closure was actually accepted, which means I do have to carry on and take the vote.

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I think I can be of assistance.

The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Well, I hope so.

Your account of events is not correct. You certainly attempted to put the vote. There was a lot of interruption. I was calling for a point of order from the moment Mr Hughes moved the closure motion. I called for a point of order several times. You were not looking in my direction, because of the general uproar. You then noticed me, right at the end of the process but before you had declared the vote, and you called me for the point of order that led to the Speaker being recalled. So the two points I make are that, firstly, I had been seeking a point of order before you even put the motion, and, secondly, you acknowledged that and called me before you had declared the result. Therefore, the process had not commenced.

The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you, Mr Dunne. I again say that it is my recollection that I asked, and Government members said “Yes” and members on this side said “No”, and in-between that I heard your point of order. Because there was such an uproar, it was difficult for me to hear, as well. I have a different recollection of the situation. The chief Government whip has asked that the Speaker be recalled. The question now is that the Speaker be recalled. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.

Motion agreed to, and House resumed.

Speaker Recalled