Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Hansard source

Just before we go to the matter of public importance, I just want to say, for the information of members—I'm not seeking to get involved in political discussion—that obviously there was quite a bit of commentary on my giving precedence to the motion of privilege last Wednesday. That has led a large number of you simply to ask about the process. So I thought it would be useful just for me to make a very brief statement to the House for the information of members, just to briefly outline what did and, more importantly, what did not happen.

What did happen was that, following the matter of privilege being raised by the Manager of Opposition Business, I considered the issue and determined that I would give precedence for a motion moved by the person who initially raised the issue of privilege, or any other member.

What this means I outlined clearly in the last two paragraphs of my statement on Wednesday, but I think it's worth just repeating those:

As members would also be aware, and as House of Representatives Practice makes clear, 'an opinion by the Speaker that a prima facie case has been made out does not imply a conclusion that a breach of privilege or contempt has occurred.'

In giving precedence for a motion to be moved, I am simply allowing the House the opportunity to consider a motion immediately and debate and decide on whether the matter should be referred to the committee for inquiry and report.

As the practice also points out—I know many members are very familiar with it but I just want to point it out for other members who have been asking questions—the prima facie case relates to the moving of the motion, which puts the matter in the hands of the House.

Many commenters have said, and I'm talking commentators outside of this House, I made a ruling, but this is not correct. I did not make a ruling. As practice states:

An opinion by the Speaker on a complaint raised under standing order 51—

That's the standing order that deals with issues of privilege—

is not a ruling and so a dissent motion, as provided for in standing order 87, is not in order.

The reason why this is important is that the Speaker's decision to either grant precedence or not cannot be dissented from; granting precedence is permissive only. It enables the next step, that a member may move a motion to refer a matter of privilege to the committee. It's the role of the House to consider that proposal and make a decision about referral of the matter. I just thought that would be useful for members who have been asking about that.

See this speech in context