Financial Review Debate — Procedure

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I do not want to interrupt the debate, but it is our understanding that this debate is a 4-hour debate and it is rigidly controlled. Last year, much time was lost by unnecessary points of order, in our view, so we seek leave of the House that when a party or an individual takes a point of order, that time will be deducted from that person’s party.

Leave is sought for that course being followed. Is there any objection? There is.

I want to say to members that I would like to make a comment on this matter from the Chair. This is a time-limited debate and there are a limited number of slots. I hope there are very, very few points of order, because that is unfair to smaller parties. I know the point that Mr Brown is making; it was considered by the Standing Orders Committee, but there was no change in that regard. I wonder whether I could crave the indulgence of other members: when the discussions come up on the two areas that I have any association with, is it likely that anyone will take a call? [Interruption] Thank you very much.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It would be quite wrong to say that points of order were to come off the time of the party that raised them, because it may be that the speaker was inciting another party and it had to take a point of order for protection. But the way around the problem, and I would be happy to do so, is to seek leave for the debate to be extended by the length of time taken by any points of order.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course? There is.

In Committee