Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

I remind the member for Chifley that everything he has said will be achieved by the amendments proposed by the opposition. The essence of what we are proposing is that there be the same accountability on Fridays as there is on other days of the week. The feature that distinguishes the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy from so many others around the world is the accountability of the executive at question time. It is fundamental. It is the most important part of parliament. For most members of the public it is when they see their government held to account. To have a meeting of parliament without question time really is denying the very essence of the accountability that we hold so dear. So that the members of the government can address this point, I particularly want to draw to the attention of the House section 39 of the Constitution. It states:

Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the presence of at least one-third of the whole number of the members of the House of Representatives shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the House for the exercise of its powers.

‘Parliament’ means the House, the Senate and the Governor-General—the Queen, the sovereign. In 1989 the parliament ‘otherwise provided’ to reduce the quorum down to one-fifth. That is why the quorum is now 30; otherwise, it would have been 50. The simple fact is that the House cannot meet without a quorum. We are free to agree, if we wish, not to call a quorum. That is, in effect, what the existing standing orders do in the 6.30 to eight o’clock timeslot, and that is reflected in the standing orders at the moment. But the constitutional fact remains that, if a quorum is not present, the House cannot meet, and deferring a quorum is simply not constitutional. I see that the member for Isaacs is here. I welcome him, as a new member, to the House, and I invite him to comment on this.

The language of the Constitution is absolutely clear: the House cannot meet unless a quorum is present. If a quorum is called at any time on a Friday, it has to be dealt with when it is called. You cannot defer a quorum by virtue of the standing orders because otherwise you would be able to subvert the whole purpose of the constitutional provision. At the very heart of this proposal by the government is an infringement, a breach, a denial of the Constitution itself. They say they have legal advice. Let us see it. That is the point. The Constitution is plain: you cannot have a meeting of the House unless there is a quorum present. That is the point. What power is there in the standing orders to overrule the Constitution of the Commonwealth?

See this speech in context