Territory Stories

Minutes of Proceedings Day 3 - Thursday 1 December 1994

Details:

Title

Minutes of Proceedings Day 3 - Thursday 1 December 1994

Other title

Parliamentary Record 7

Collection

Minutes of Proceedings for 7th Assembly 1994 - 1997; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 7th Assembly 1994 - 1997

Date

1994-12-01

Description

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Language

English

Subject

Minutes of Proceedings

Publisher name

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Place of publication

Darwin

File type

application/pdf

Use

Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

License

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/282203

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/413167

Page content

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS-Thursday 1 Dcccmbcr 1994 Mr Hatton Mrs Padgham-Purich Mr Manzie Mr Rioli Mr McCarthy Mr Stirling Mr Palmer Mr Poole Mr Reed Mr Setter Mr Stone And so it was resolved in the affirmative. Question - put and passed. 14. NOTICES BY LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION AND THE CHIEF MINISTER REFERRING MATTER TO THE SESSIONAL COMMITTEE ON THE USE AND ABUSE OF ALCOHOL BY THE COM M UNITY-STATEM ENT BY SPEAKER: The Speaker advised Members that he had investigated the matter o f the point o f order raised by the Leader o f the Opposition (Mr Ede) yesterday in relation to the noticc presented by the C hief Minister (Mr Perron) which he asserted contravened Standing Orders. The Speaker made the following statement Last night, the Chief Minister sought and was granted leave o f the House to give noticc o f a motion to refer a matter to the Sessional Committee on the Use and Abuse o f Alcohol by the Community. At that time, the Leader o f the Opposition raised a point o f order to the effect that the proposed notice should be ruled out o f order on the grounds that it contravened the provisions o f Standing Order 129 relating to the anticipation o f business. I undertook to investigate the matter and advise the House before the commencement o f business today. I have examined the content o f the notices given by the Chief Minister and the Leader o f the Opposition and, while they contain two similar clauscs, the proposed motions arc not the same in substance. Standing Order 129, relating to the anticipation o f business, mirrors similar Standing Orders in place in the House o f Representatives and the House o f Commons. The rule against anticipation is stated in Erskine May as follows: ....a matter must not be anticipated if it is contained in a more effective form o f proceeding than the proceeding by which it is sought to be anticipated, but it may be anticipated if it is contained in an equally or less effective form.. The House o f Representatives Standing Order 163 and the practice based on Speakers Rulings over some 75 years has been that one noticc o f motion cannot block another.. The reason for this practice is that, at that stage, they arc an equally effective form o f proceeding. Accordingly, I advise the House that 1 consider both notices to be in order and they appear on todays Notice Paper in the order prescribed by Standing Orders 93 and 104. 172