Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I have a question to you. Mr Speaker, my question to you relates to the ruling you made during question time relying on the ruling of Senator Wood as Acting Deputy President of the Senate in 1955 and contained on page 501 of House of Representatives Practice. The distinction in that ruling is that you would not require things to be withdrawn where they were political matters, but you would require things to be withdrawn where they were offensive in some personal way.

The allegation that someone is ‘soft on drugs’ is an allegation that someone is soft on criminal conduct and an allegation that someone is soft on an issue that kills and harms thousands of Australians each year. Mr Speaker, if you do not believe that that allegation is offensive in a personal way, does that mean, for example, that if I were to say—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. You ruled on that question earlier in question time. You made a very firm ruling. The member opposite is now attempting to debate your ruling—which, quite frankly, is against the standing orders.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Mackellar. I am listening closely to the Manager of Opposition Business. I ask her to come to the final part of her question.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I am asking you to reflect on the meaning of your ruling and where it leads to in terms of conduct in this House. I am specifically asking you to reflect on the question of whether you would now rule, were I to assert that every member of the government—

Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The procedures of this House and the standing orders provide a process to members of the House by which they can disagree with your rulings. They require a written disagreement and a written seconder. There is a practice now in this House to abuse questions without notice to you, to debate issues on which members have the opportunity, under the processes of this House, to move a dissent or a censure if that is true. They should not continue this practice.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for O’Connor has made his point. He does raise a valid point of order. I remind the Manager of Opposition Business that, while it is certainly in order to raise questions to me, I do not believe it is proper to debate or raise hypotheticals. I have been listening closely. Does the Manager of Opposition Business have anything further to add to her question?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I do. I am trying to understand, for the future edification of members of this House, whether it will be in order for people to say things like: ‘Every member of the government is soft on violence against women’—and, if it is not, what the intellectual distinction is.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Manager of Opposition Business will not debate her point of order.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will look forward to that clarification when we get it.