Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Arts) Share this | Hansard source

I wish to raise a point of order on relevance. I don't want to be seen to be weighing into the debate about the science back and forth as to what's being put by the member for Hughes, but I do want to refer to the importance of simply being relevant to the point of discussion. If, for example, this speech were being given during the adjournment, I would not raise a point of order. If it were being given as a motion or given as a 90 second statement, I wouldn't be raising a point of order. But relevance is no small issue, and I just want to quote from page 510 of Practice:

Of fundamental importance to the conduct of debate in the House is the rule that a Member should speak only on the subject matter of a question under discussion. At the same time the standing orders and practice of the House make provision for some major exceptions to this principle when debates of a general nature may take place.

It then gives examples of what those exceptions are. They're the adjournment debate, the address in reply to the Governor-General's speech, any appropriations bill, and on the question that grievances be noted. All of those opportunities are there. There is one change to a bill which is when a second reading amendment has been moved. That does broaden the debate. But the second reading amendment that's been moved deals with two issues. It deals with deaths by neglect within the National Disability Insurance Scheme as a federal government program and it deals with a commitment to genuine consultation on all major changes to the NDIS Act. I simply put it to you, Deputy Speaker, that there is no way that the comments that are being made now are relevant to what is before the House. If it was a different second reading amendment it might be different or if it were any of the exceptions it might be different.

See this speech in context