Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Hansard source

I am very familiar, obviously, with this terrain, and I'll take a little bit of time of the House to explain my approach on this. The former Speaker gave a comprehensive ruling on this matter back near the beginning of the last parliament, because the standing order to which the Manager of Opposition Business refers was introduced back then, at the beginning of that parliament. The former Speaker rightly pointed out a number of things. It was a lengthy ruling; I won't go through every aspect of it. She quite rightly, in my view, pointed out that this additional standing order posed challenges for the Speaker. One is in balancing free speech also with a misrepresentation being repeated.

She adopted a number of principles, which I've said previously in the House I abide by: No. 1, the claim would have to be of the exact nature again—and I am listening very carefully, and in this folder I have many things, including previous personal explanations. It would have to be of the exact nature, and I was listening very carefully to the answer. It would then need to be raised by the member affected: that is, the member—and that would be the Leader of the Opposition—who made the personal explanation. The Speaker would need to be aware of exactly what was said, and for it to be an exact replication. And, even after all that, standing order 68—I have the page open here—says, 'The Speaker may intervene.'

Now, I'm listening very closely. I'm very conscious that, prior to the introduction of this standing order, the Speaker could not intervene. I'm very conscious that that is something that the House has decided to include in the standing orders to give the Speaker that option. I'm just going to say to the Attorney-General that I'm listening very closely. He hasn't exactly met the threshold, but I've taken the time of the House for any subsequent answers to questions to make that matter clear.

See this speech in context