Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill

Mr Speaker, the member the Hon Louise Upston has asked that you be recalled about a closure motion that I have accepted. I believe that there were a number of points of order that were repetitive and trivial, relitigating the same points that I thought I had dealt with. The member’s disagreed, and so has asked that you be recalled.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. There are a number of points that I wish to put on the table for your consideration, sir. The first is around points of order that, as well as myself, others were raising regarding amendments that had been tabled in the latter part of this debate. One, sir, in my name, had been tabled at the start of the day, and I had not been given any indication—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Can I ask the member to refer to the particular Standing Order or Speaker’s ruling she’s asking me to uphold or change?

I’ll come back to that point, sir. In terms of my understanding of the order of the House, members have the ability to raise points of order, and, in this instance, points of order were being raised very close to 1 o’clock. The presiding officer at the time ignored multiple members that were raising different points of order, and moved further in the proceedings. My understanding of the House’s procedure is that at 1 o’clock the bells ring and the House lifts. At the point in time that that was happening, there were multiple members with different points of order, and, given the House is in urgency, sir, I think it is important, given this is the only opportunity for scrutiny—

Right. I think the member’s made her point. Is there anyone from the Government who wants to add to it?

💬 Jami-Lee Ross: Point of order.

I will call Jami-Lee Ross, but I’ll remind him that I’ve watched the television.

Sir, I’m glad you watched the television, because there are a couple of points of order I wish to raise. The first point—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: No, no. The only thing that the member can do is to address the question before the House—sit down, please—on the reference made by Louise Upston. There is nothing else before the House.

I will raise the other matter with you later, then. Standing Order 58, “Effect of urgency”, says when the House sits till, and it says that the House will suspend at 1 p.m.—the committee will suspend at 1 p.m., in this instance. The committee must suspend at 1 p.m. unless the committee is in the middle of a vote. Whilst we have disputed the reasoning, we must accept that the Chair did accept a closure motion. However, that was not voted on. We were not voting, and at the point when we got to 1 o’clock, there were members who were seeking to raise points of order and there were members who were seeking to have a ruling from the Chair. We are very unhappy that the Chair was not willing to entertain any points of order. We also dispute the Chair’s decision to continue to go past 1 o’clock, when the Standing Orders are very clear. We were not voting—

OK, thank you. Thank you. Is there any other member who wishes to make a point on this?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just want to raise that, relating to the point of order raised by Louise Upston, once a vote has been commenced, is it in order for a member of the House to scream at the presiding officer through the conduct—

Order! The member will resume his seat. I did indicate that I had been watching the television and am aware of the behaviour in the House at the time. This matter is a very simple matter. The question of the closure is something that is at the discretion of the Chair. I have not known, ever, of any circumstances where a Speaker has overruled a Chair in accepting a closure, and I’m certainly not going to do that. Speaker’s ruling 61/3 is the one that is very clear on that.

The question then becomes: was the closure accepted before 1 o’clock? It was clearly accepted before 1 o’clock, probably around 5 to 1, and members will be absolutely aware—members will be absolutely aware—that it would totally defeat the purpose of having closure motions if they could be indefinitely delayed by points of order. My ruling is that the closure was properly accepted before 1 o’clock. The motion will be voted on now, and voting on amendments and the substantive questions will continue until they are completed. Thank you.

In Committee

Debate resumed.

Part 1 Income Tax (continued)