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

On the last sitting day, several points of order were taken and several questions were asked about the withdrawal of unparliamentary expressions. I undertook to consider the matter further. I remind members again of the statement on page 499 of House of Representatives Practice:

The determination as to whether words used in the House are offensive or disorderly rests with the chair, and the chair’s judgment depends on the nature of the word and the context in which it is used.

I considered the expression to which exception was taken on 15 February to be perhaps undesirable but not unparliamentary. I have reached similar conclusions about unedifying descriptions in the past, where there were no objections from either side of the House.

There have been at least five instances in the last 20 years when the identical phrase to the one at the centre of events on 15 February was used to describe a member, without any objection being raised. Furthermore, I remind members that good temper and moderation should be the characteristics of parliamentary language. I also reiterate the point made by several members that, pursuant to standing order 64, members should be referred to by their ministerial or parliamentary office or by their electorate.