Urgent Debates Declined — Employment, 90-day Trial Period—Government Response to Department of Labour Report

I have received a letter from the Hon Phil Goff seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Government’s announcement today relating to mining in schedule 4 of the conservation estate. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. The purpose of the urgent debate procedure is to provide an opportunity for the House to hold the Government accountable for its decisions. As Speaker’s ruling 175/6 makes clear, not every ministerial announcement, even an important one, will give grounds for an urgent debate. There must be such an element of urgency that the matter must take precedence over other business. The Government’s announcement that it no longer plans to remove any land from schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act 1991 for the purposes of further mineral exploration or extraction proposes no change to the status quo. In those circumstances, I do not believe there is any justification that would require the setting aside of the usual business of the House to debate this matter. This application for an urgent debate is therefore declined.

I have also received a letter from the Hon Trevor Mallard seeking an urgent debate on the Government’s reaction to the Department of Labour report entitled Trial Employment Periods: An Evaluation of the First Year of Operation. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. This report evaluates the 90-day trial employment period that came into effect on 1 March 2009. The findings of the report have been referred to by the Government when announcing recent policy changes to extend the 90-day trial period. The findings of the report, although important, can be examined in a number of ways by the House. An oral question on this matter has been lodged and answered today. Also, in considering whether a matter requires the urgent attention of the House it is relevant to consider whether the matter proposed to be debated must come before the House reasonably soon in the form of legislation. The Government has announced that it intends to introduce legislation into Parliament soon to enact the proposed changes. The consideration of this legislation will provide the opportunity to debate the evaluation of the 90-day trial period. This application for an urgent debate is also declined.